Re: [PATCH v3] landlock: Expand restrict flags example for ABI version 8
From: Mickaël Salaün
Date: Tue Mar 03 2026 - 13:20:38 EST
On Sat, Feb 28, 2026 at 10:36:59PM +0100, Panagiotis "Ivory" Vasilopoulos wrote:
> Add LANDLOCK_RESTRICT_SELF_TSYNC to the backwards compatibility example
> for restrict flags. This introduces completeness, similar to that of
> the ruleset attributes example. However, as the new example can impact
> enforcement in certain cases, an appropriate warning is also included.
>
> Additionally, I modified the two comments of the example to make them
> more consistent with the ruleset attributes example's.
>
> Signed-off-by: Panagiotis 'Ivory' Vasilopoulos <git@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Co-developed-by: Dan Cojocaru <dan@xxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Dan Cojocaru <dan@xxxxxxxx>
> ---
> Changes in v3:
> - Add __attribute__((fallthrough)) like in earlier example.
> - Improve comment for LANDLOCK_RESTRICT_SELF_TSYNC (ABI < 8) example.
> - Add relevant warning for ABI < 8 example based on Günther's feedback.
> - Link to v2: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20260221-landlock-docs-add-tsync-example-v2-1-60990986bba5@xxxxxxxxxxx
>
> Changes in v2:
> - Fix formatting error.
> - Link to v1: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20260221-landlock-docs-add-tsync-example-v1-1-f89383809eb4@xxxxxxxxxxx
> ---
> Documentation/userspace-api/landlock.rst | 28 ++++++++++++++++++++++++----
> 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/userspace-api/landlock.rst b/Documentation/userspace-api/landlock.rst
> index 13134bccdd39d78ddce3daf454f32dda162ce91b..b71ac7aa308260b8141e5d35248fb68cec6dcba9 100644
> --- a/Documentation/userspace-api/landlock.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/userspace-api/landlock.rst
> @@ -196,13 +196,33 @@ similar backwards compatibility check is needed for the restrict flags
> (see sys_landlock_restrict_self() documentation for available flags):
>
> .. code-block:: c
> -
> - __u32 restrict_flags = LANDLOCK_RESTRICT_SELF_LOG_NEW_EXEC_ON;
> - if (abi < 7) {
> - /* Clear logging flags unsupported before ABI 7. */
> + __u32 restrict_flags =
> + LANDLOCK_RESTRICT_SELF_LOG_NEW_EXEC_ON |
> + LANDLOCK_RESTRICT_SELF_TSYNC;
> + switch (abi) {
> + case 1 ... 6:
> + /* Clear logging flags unsupported for ABI < 7 */
> restrict_flags &= ~(LANDLOCK_RESTRICT_SELF_LOG_SAME_EXEC_OFF |
> LANDLOCK_RESTRICT_SELF_LOG_NEW_EXEC_ON |
> LANDLOCK_RESTRICT_SELF_LOG_SUBDOMAINS_OFF);
> + __attribute__((fallthrough));
> + case 7:
> + /* Removes multithreaded enforcement flag unsupported for ABI < 8 */
> + /*
> + * WARNING!
> + * Don't copy-paste this just yet! This example impacts enforcement
> + * and can potentially decrease protection if misused.
What could be the use case when that would be an issue? What would be
the consequence wrt just tampering with a sibling thread?
> + *
> + * Below ABI v8, a Landlock policy can only be enforced for the calling
> + * thread and its children. This behavior remains a default for ABI v8,
> + * but the flag ``LANDLOCK_RESTRICT_SELF_TSYNC`` can now be used to
> + * enforce policies across all threads of the calling process. If an
> + * application's Landlock integration was designed under the assumption
> + * that the flag is used (such as when children threads are responsible
> + * for enforcing and/or overriding policies of parents and siblings),
> + * removing said flag can decrease protection for older Linux versions.
In this case, the application *must* check the ABI version and exit with
an error if it is not supported. That's the same use case as programs
wishing to sandbox themselves at least with a specific set of
restrictions.
> + */
> + restrict_flags &= ~LANDLOCK_RESTRICT_SELF_TSYNC;
> }
>
> The next step is to restrict the current thread from gaining more privileges
>
> ---
> base-commit: ceb977bfe9e8715e6cd3a4785c7aab8ea5cd2b77
> change-id: 20260221-landlock-docs-add-tsync-example-e8fd5c64a366
>
> Best regards,
> --
> Panagiotis "Ivory" Vasilopoulos <git@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>
>