linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH bpf-next v8 0/8] MAC and Audit policy using eBPF (KRSI)

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: <CACYkzJ4v_X87-+GCE++g0_BkcJWFhbNePAMQmH8Ccgq7id-akA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Sat, 28 Mar 2020 23:30:13 +0100
From:   KP Singh <kpsingh@...omium.org>
To:     Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc:     Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Security Module list 
        <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>, Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>,
        Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>,
        Florent Revest <revest@...omium.org>,
        Brendan Jackman <jackmanb@...omium.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v8 0/8] MAC and Audit policy using eBPF (KRSI)

On Sat, Mar 28, 2020 at 10:50 PM Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Mar 28, 2020 at 08:56:36PM +0100, KP Singh wrote:
> > Since the attachment succeeds and the hook does not get called, it
> > seems like "bpf" LSM is not being initialized and the hook, although
> > present, does not get called.
> >
> > This indicates that "bpf" is not in CONFIG_LSM. It should, however, be
> > there by default as we added it to default value of CONFIG_LSM and
> > also for other DEFAULT_SECURITY_* options.
> >
> > Let me know if that's the case and it fixes it.
>
> Is the selftest expected to at least fail cleanly (i.e. not segfault)

I am not sure where the crash comes from, it does not look like it's test_lsm,
it seems to happen in test_overhead. Both seem to run fine for me.

- KP

> when the BPF LSF is not built into the kernel?
>
> --
> Kees Cook