`MFD_NOEXEC_SEAL` should remove the executable bits and set
`F_SEAL_EXEC` to prevent further modifications to the executable
bits as per the comment in the uapi header file:

  not executable and sealed to prevent changing to executable

However, currently, it also unsets `F_SEAL_SEAL`, essentially
acting as a superset of `MFD_ALLOW_SEALING`. Nothing implies
that it should be so, and indeed up until the second version
of the of the patchset[0] that introduced `MFD_EXEC` and
`MFD_NOEXEC_SEAL`, `F_SEAL_SEAL` was not removed, however it
was changed in the third revision of the patchset[1] without
a clear explanation.

This behaviour is suprising for application developers,
there is no documentation that would reveal that `MFD_NOEXEC_SEAL`
has the additional effect of `MFD_ALLOW_SEALING`.

So do not remove `F_SEAL_SEAL` when `MFD_NOEXEC_SEAL` is requested.
This is technically an ABI break, but it seems very unlikely that an
application would depend on this behaviour (unless by accident).

[0]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20220805222126.142525-3-jef...@google.com/
[1]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20221202013404.163143-3-jef...@google.com/

Fixes: 105ff5339f498a ("mm/memfd: add MFD_NOEXEC_SEAL and MFD_EXEC")
Signed-off-by: Barnabás Pőcze <po...@protonmail.com>
---

Or did I miss the explanation as to why MFD_NOEXEC_SEAL should
imply MFD_ALLOW_SEALING? If so, please direct me to it and
sorry for the noise.

---
 mm/memfd.c                                 | 9 ++++-----
 tools/testing/selftests/memfd/memfd_test.c | 2 +-
 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/mm/memfd.c b/mm/memfd.c
index 7d8d3ab3fa37..8b7f6afee21d 100644
--- a/mm/memfd.c
+++ b/mm/memfd.c
@@ -356,12 +356,11 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE2(memfd_create,
 
                inode->i_mode &= ~0111;
                file_seals = memfd_file_seals_ptr(file);
-               if (file_seals) {
-                       *file_seals &= ~F_SEAL_SEAL;
+               if (file_seals)
                        *file_seals |= F_SEAL_EXEC;
-               }
-       } else if (flags & MFD_ALLOW_SEALING) {
-               /* MFD_EXEC and MFD_ALLOW_SEALING are set */
+       }
+
+       if (flags & MFD_ALLOW_SEALING) {
                file_seals = memfd_file_seals_ptr(file);
                if (file_seals)
                        *file_seals &= ~F_SEAL_SEAL;
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/memfd/memfd_test.c 
b/tools/testing/selftests/memfd/memfd_test.c
index 18f585684e20..b6a7ad68c3c1 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/memfd/memfd_test.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/memfd/memfd_test.c
@@ -1151,7 +1151,7 @@ static void test_noexec_seal(void)
                            mfd_def_size,
                            MFD_CLOEXEC | MFD_NOEXEC_SEAL);
        mfd_assert_mode(fd, 0666);
-       mfd_assert_has_seals(fd, F_SEAL_EXEC);
+       mfd_assert_has_seals(fd, F_SEAL_SEAL | F_SEAL_EXEC);
        mfd_fail_chmod(fd, 0777);
        close(fd);
 }
-- 
2.45.0



Reply via email to