linux-kernel - Re: Linux 5.0-rc2 seccomp_bpf user_notification

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]

Date:   Thu, 17 Jan 2019 08:41:59 -0800
From:   Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To:     Tycho Andersen <tycho@...ho.ws>
Cc:     shuah <shuah@...nel.org>, James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" 
        <linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Linux 5.0-rc2 seccomp_bpf user_notification_basic test hangs

On Thu, Jan 17, 2019 at 8:27 AM Tycho Andersen <tycho@...ho.ws> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jan 17, 2019 at 08:12:50AM -0800, Kees Cook wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 5:26 PM shuah <shuah@...nel.org> wrote:
> > > I am running Linux 5.0-rc2 and not an older kernel.
> >
> > Weird. I couldn't reproduce this on 5.0-rc2, but I did see it on a
> > kernel without seccomp user_notif. Does the patch I sent fix it for
> > you? (And if so, can you take it in your tree?)
>
> I can reproduce it; you have to run it as non-root. I think your patch
> is necessary to get it to at least fail. The question is: what should
> we do about these tests that require real root? Skip them if we're not
> real-root, I guess?

Hm, maybe use the XFAIL() bit of the harness?

Perhaps it's time to make it a root-only test and do internal
priv-dropping to test the nnp-requiring parts? I'll add it to the TODO
list...

-Kees

-- 
Kees Cook