summaryrefslogtreecommitdiffstats
path: root/Documentation/userspace-api/check_exec.rst
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorLinus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>2026-08-23 13:28:57 -0700
committerLinus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>2026-08-23 13:28:57 -0700
commit4352b8aee98005853aa63f57d6377282de17a33f (patch)
tree27614d7a9ef05c32d089004e104364ce42324837 /Documentation/userspace-api/check_exec.rst
downloadlinux-stable-4352b8aee98005853aa63f57d6377282de17a33f.tar.gz
linux-stable-4352b8aee98005853aa63f57d6377282de17a33f.zip
Merge tag 'i3c/for-7.3' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/i3c/linuxgrafted
Pull I3C updates from Alexandre Belloni: "A new driver this cycle, for the AMD AXI I3C controller. There are also new features such as IBI wakeup support, SETAASA device discovery and ACPI support for the the DAA methods, meaning we can now communicate with the SPD devices on DDR5 modules. New driver: - AMD AXI I3C master controller Subsystem: - I3C Common Command Code (CCC) handling improvements, especially around GET CCCs - SETAASA device discovery support - ACPI support for all existing DAA methods like SETDASA, SETNEWDA as well as I2C devices on I3C bus - IBI-based wakeup support Drivers: - dw: SETAASA support - mipi-i3c-hci: advertise IBI wakeup capability, AMD_PT I3C controller support, PIO queue management support for HCI v1.2 - renesas: improve suspend to RAM support, add runtime PM support" * tag 'i3c/for-7.3' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/i3c/linux: (70 commits) i3c: dw: reduce do_daa time if there's no client i3c: mipi-i3c-hci: Add support for AMD_PT I3C controller i3c: mipi-i3c-hci: Add PIO queue management support for HCI v1.2 i3c: mipi-i3c-hci: Fix missing STAT_IBI_STATUS_THLD in PIO mode i3c: dw: rename "pclk" to "apb" to match dt-binding i3c: dw: make struct dw_i3c_cmd smaller i3c: dw: use COMMAND_PORT_TRANSFER_ARG instead of hardcoding i3c: renesas: Don't register devices when ENTDAA times out i3c: master: dw-i3c-master: fix OD timing for first broadcast i3c: mipi-i3c-hci: Advertise IBI wakeup capability i3c: mipi-i3c-hci: Factor out i3c_hci_sysdev() i3c: mipi-i3c-hci-pci: Propagate I3C wakeup requirements to PCI i3c: master: Reject IBI requests from non-IBI-capable devices i3c: master: Add helper to query bus wakeup requirements i3c: master: Report wakeup events for IBIs i3c: master: Support IBI-based wakeup capability i3c: master: Fix potential UAF in i3c_device_match() i3c: master: Fix potential UAF in i3c_device_uevent() i3c: Make dev->desc locking assumptions explicit i3c: master: Fix use-after-free of master->this ...
Diffstat (limited to 'Documentation/userspace-api/check_exec.rst')
-rw-r--r--Documentation/userspace-api/check_exec.rst144
1 files changed, 144 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/Documentation/userspace-api/check_exec.rst b/Documentation/userspace-api/check_exec.rst
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..05dfe3b56
--- /dev/null
+++ b/Documentation/userspace-api/check_exec.rst
@@ -0,0 +1,144 @@
+.. SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
+.. Copyright © 2024 Microsoft Corporation
+
+===================
+Executability check
+===================
+
+The ``AT_EXECVE_CHECK`` :manpage:`execveat(2)` flag, and the
+``SECBIT_EXEC_RESTRICT_FILE`` and ``SECBIT_EXEC_DENY_INTERACTIVE`` securebits
+are intended for script interpreters and dynamic linkers to enforce a
+consistent execution security policy handled by the kernel. See the
+`samples/check-exec/inc.c`_ example.
+
+Whether an interpreter should check these securebits or not depends on the
+security risk of running malicious scripts with respect to the execution
+environment, and whether the kernel can check if a script is trustworthy or
+not. For instance, Python scripts running on a server can use arbitrary
+syscalls and access arbitrary files. Such interpreters should then be
+enlighten to use these securebits and let users define their security policy.
+However, a JavaScript engine running in a web browser should already be
+sandboxed and then should not be able to harm the user's environment.
+
+Script interpreters or dynamic linkers built for tailored execution environments
+(e.g. hardened Linux distributions or hermetic container images) could use
+``AT_EXECVE_CHECK`` without checking the related securebits if backward
+compatibility is handled by something else (e.g. atomic update ensuring that
+all legitimate libraries are allowed to be executed). It is then recommended
+for script interpreters and dynamic linkers to check the securebits at run time
+by default, but also to provide the ability for custom builds to behave like if
+``SECBIT_EXEC_RESTRICT_FILE`` or ``SECBIT_EXEC_DENY_INTERACTIVE`` were always
+set to 1 (i.e. always enforce restrictions).
+
+AT_EXECVE_CHECK
+===============
+
+Passing the ``AT_EXECVE_CHECK`` flag to :manpage:`execveat(2)` only performs a
+check on a regular file and returns 0 if execution of this file would be
+allowed, ignoring the file format and then the related interpreter dependencies
+(e.g. ELF libraries, script's shebang).
+
+Programs should always perform this check to apply kernel-level checks against
+files that are not directly executed by the kernel but passed to a user space
+interpreter instead. All files that contain executable code, from the point of
+view of the interpreter, should be checked. However the result of this check
+should only be enforced according to ``SECBIT_EXEC_RESTRICT_FILE`` or
+``SECBIT_EXEC_DENY_INTERACTIVE.``.
+
+The main purpose of this flag is to improve the security and consistency of an
+execution environment to ensure that direct file execution (e.g.
+``./script.sh``) and indirect file execution (e.g. ``sh script.sh``) lead to
+the same result. For instance, this can be used to check if a file is
+trustworthy according to the caller's environment.
+
+In a secure environment, libraries and any executable dependencies should also
+be checked. For instance, dynamic linking should make sure that all libraries
+are allowed for execution to avoid trivial bypass (e.g. using ``LD_PRELOAD``).
+For such secure execution environment to make sense, only trusted code should
+be executable, which also requires integrity guarantees.
+
+To avoid race conditions leading to time-of-check to time-of-use issues,
+``AT_EXECVE_CHECK`` should be used with ``AT_EMPTY_PATH`` to check against a
+file descriptor instead of a path.
+
+SECBIT_EXEC_RESTRICT_FILE and SECBIT_EXEC_DENY_INTERACTIVE
+==========================================================
+
+When ``SECBIT_EXEC_RESTRICT_FILE`` is set, a process should only interpret or
+execute a file if a call to :manpage:`execveat(2)` with the related file
+descriptor and the ``AT_EXECVE_CHECK`` flag succeed.
+
+This secure bit may be set by user session managers, service managers,
+container runtimes, sandboxer tools... Except for test environments, the
+related ``SECBIT_EXEC_RESTRICT_FILE_LOCKED`` bit should also be set.
+
+Programs should only enforce consistent restrictions according to the
+securebits but without relying on any other user-controlled configuration.
+Indeed, the use case for these securebits is to only trust executable code
+vetted by the system configuration (through the kernel), so we should be
+careful to not let untrusted users control this configuration.
+
+However, script interpreters may still use user configuration such as
+environment variables as long as it is not a way to disable the securebits
+checks. For instance, the ``PATH`` and ``LD_PRELOAD`` variables can be set by
+a script's caller. Changing these variables may lead to unintended code
+executions, but only from vetted executable programs, which is OK. For this to
+make sense, the system should provide a consistent security policy to avoid
+arbitrary code execution e.g., by enforcing a write xor execute policy.
+
+When ``SECBIT_EXEC_DENY_INTERACTIVE`` is set, a process should never interpret
+interactive user commands (e.g. scripts). However, if such commands are passed
+through a file descriptor (e.g. stdin), its content should be interpreted if a
+call to :manpage:`execveat(2)` with the related file descriptor and the
+``AT_EXECVE_CHECK`` flag succeed.
+
+For instance, script interpreters called with a script snippet as argument
+should always deny such execution if ``SECBIT_EXEC_DENY_INTERACTIVE`` is set.
+
+This secure bit may be set by user session managers, service managers,
+container runtimes, sandboxer tools... Except for test environments, the
+related ``SECBIT_EXEC_DENY_INTERACTIVE_LOCKED`` bit should also be set.
+
+Here is the expected behavior for a script interpreter according to combination
+of any exec securebits:
+
+1. ``SECBIT_EXEC_RESTRICT_FILE=0`` and ``SECBIT_EXEC_DENY_INTERACTIVE=0``
+
+ Always interpret scripts, and allow arbitrary user commands (default).
+
+ No threat, everyone and everything is trusted, but we can get ahead of
+ potential issues thanks to the call to :manpage:`execveat(2)` with
+ ``AT_EXECVE_CHECK`` which should always be performed but ignored by the
+ script interpreter. Indeed, this check is still important to enable systems
+ administrators to verify requests (e.g. with audit) and prepare for
+ migration to a secure mode.
+
+2. ``SECBIT_EXEC_RESTRICT_FILE=1`` and ``SECBIT_EXEC_DENY_INTERACTIVE=0``
+
+ Deny script interpretation if they are not executable, but allow
+ arbitrary user commands.
+
+ The threat is (potential) malicious scripts run by trusted (and not fooled)
+ users. That can protect against unintended script executions (e.g. ``sh
+ /tmp/*.sh``). This makes sense for (semi-restricted) user sessions.
+
+3. ``SECBIT_EXEC_RESTRICT_FILE=0`` and ``SECBIT_EXEC_DENY_INTERACTIVE=1``
+
+ Always interpret scripts, but deny arbitrary user commands.
+
+ This use case may be useful for secure services (i.e. without interactive
+ user session) where scripts' integrity is verified (e.g. with IMA/EVM or
+ dm-verity/IPE) but where access rights might not be ready yet. Indeed,
+ arbitrary interactive commands would be much more difficult to check.
+
+4. ``SECBIT_EXEC_RESTRICT_FILE=1`` and ``SECBIT_EXEC_DENY_INTERACTIVE=1``
+
+ Deny script interpretation if they are not executable, and also deny
+ any arbitrary user commands.
+
+ The threat is malicious scripts run by untrusted users (but trusted code).
+ This makes sense for system services that may only execute trusted scripts.
+
+.. Links
+.. _samples/check-exec/inc.c:
+ https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/samples/check-exec/inc.c