linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH linux-kselftest/test v1] apparmor: add AppArmor KUnit tests for policy unpack

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:   Fri, 18 Oct 2019 12:29:49 +0000
From:   Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>
To:     Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@...gle.com>,
        Matthias Maennich <maennich@...gle.com>
Cc:     shuah@...nel.org, john.johansen@...onical.com, jmorris@...ei.org,
        serge@...lyn.com, keescook@...omium.org, alan.maguire@...cle.com,
        yzaikin@...gle.com, davidgow@...gle.com, tytso@....edu,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, kunit-dev@...glegroups.com,
        linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
        Mike Salvatore <mike.salvatore@...onical.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH linux-kselftest/test v1] apparmor: add AppArmor KUnit
 tests for policy unpack

On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 05:18:16PM -0700, Brendan Higgins wrote:
> From: Mike Salvatore <mike.salvatore@...onical.com>
> 
> In order to write the tests against the policy unpacking code, some
> static functions needed to be exposed for testing purposes. One of the
> goals of this patch is to establish a pattern for which testing these
> kinds of functions should be done in the future.

And you'd run into the same situation expressed elsewhere with kunit of
an issue of the kunit test as built-in working but if built as a module
then it would not work, given the lack of exports. Symbols namespaces
should resolve this [0], and we'd be careful where a driver imports this
namespace.

[0] https://lwn.net/Articles/798254/

  Luis