linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH bpf-next 3/3] bpf: Update LSM selftests for bpf_ima_inode

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: <CACYkzJ7doNURahGQn=0d8k73USH85owoZ8yDdwtG48oQLNHYaw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Sat, 21 Nov 2020 01:20:56 +0100
From:   KP Singh <kpsingh@...omium.org>
To:     Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>
Cc:     James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
        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>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Florent Revest <revest@...omium.org>,
        Brendan Jackman <jackmanb@...omium.org>,
        Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next 3/3] bpf: Update LSM selftests for bpf_ima_inode_hash

On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 7:11 PM Yonghong Song <yhs@...com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 11/20/20 5:17 AM, KP Singh wrote:
> > From: KP Singh <kpsingh@...gle.com>
> >
> > - Update the IMA policy before executing the test binary (this is not an
> >    override of the policy, just an append that ensures that hashes are
> >    calculated on executions).
> >
> > - Call the bpf_ima_inode_hash in the bprm_committed_creds hook and check
> >    if the call succeeded and a hash was calculated.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: KP Singh <kpsingh@...gle.com>
>
> LGTM with a few nits below.
>
> Acked-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>
>
> > ---
> >   tools/testing/selftests/bpf/config            |  3 ++

[...]

> >   }
> >
> [...]
> > +
> >   void test_test_lsm(void)
> >   {
> >       struct lsm *skel = NULL;
> > @@ -66,6 +88,10 @@ void test_test_lsm(void)
> >       if (CHECK(err, "attach", "lsm attach failed: %d\n", err))
> >               goto close_prog;
> >
> > +     err = update_ima_policy();
> > +     if (CHECK(err != 0, "update_ima_policy", "error = %d\n", err))
> > +             goto close_prog;
>
> "err != 0" => err?
> "error = %d" => "err %d" for consistency with other usage in this function.

Done.

>
> > +
> >       err = exec_cmd(&skel->bss->monitored_pid);
> >       if (CHECK(err < 0, "exec_cmd", "err %d errno %d\n", err, errno))
> >               goto close_prog;
> > @@ -83,6 +109,12 @@ void test_test_lsm(void)

[...]

> >   int mprotect_count = 0;
> >   int bprm_count = 0;
> > +int ima_hash_ret = -1;
>
> The helper returns type "long", but "int" type here should be fine too.

Changed it to long for correctness.