linux-hardening - Re: [PATCH v1 2/2] selftests/mm: mseal

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CABi2SkXHqbOJM_A=m2n2AzH-1DY2NQPOVn66A9QYyhYCxLeQZA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2024 12:40:44 -0700
From: Jeff Xu <jeffxu@...omium.org>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org, pedro.falcato@...il.com, 
	rientjes@...gle.com, keescook@...omium.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 2/2] selftests/mm: mseal_test add more tests

Hi Mark

On Thu, Aug 29, 2024 at 9:16 AM Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Aug 28, 2024 at 10:55:22PM +0000, jeffxu@...omium.org wrote:
>
> > Add more testcases and increase test coverage, e.g. add
> > get_vma_size to check VMA size and prot bits.
>
> I think this needs to be split into multiple patches, for example the
> new test cases done separately to the additions to the existing ones,
> possibly as multiple patches (eg, should the size changes be split from
> the prot ones?).
The size check should go with prot., because it is part of verifying
the sealed VMAs.
I will split the patch into updating existing tests and adding new tests.

Thanks
-Jeff