netdev - Re: [RFCv2 9/9] selftests: Initial TCP-AO support for fcnal-test

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: <f7625876-3ee0-53ba-a45a-a5d38edfd2bf@gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 11 Aug 2021 22:09:32 +0300
From:   Leonard Crestez <cdleonard@...il.com>
To:     David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>,
        Leonard Crestez <cdleonard@...il.com>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
        Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@...zon.co.jp>,
        David Ahern <dsahern@...nel.org>
Cc:     Hideaki YOSHIFUJI <yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Yuchung Cheng <ycheng@...gle.com>,
        Francesco Ruggeri <fruggeri@...sta.com>,
        Mat Martineau <mathew.j.martineau@...ux.intel.com>,
        Christoph Paasch <cpaasch@...le.com>,
        Ivan Delalande <colona@...sta.com>,
        Priyaranjan Jha <priyarjha@...gle.com>,
        Menglong Dong <dong.menglong@....com.cn>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFCv2 9/9] selftests: Initial TCP-AO support for fcnal-test

On 11.08.2021 16:46, David Ahern wrote:
> On 8/9/21 3:35 PM, Leonard Crestez wrote:
>> Just test that a correct password is required.
>>
> 
> This test suite needs to be comprehensive that the UAPI works as
> designed and fails when it should - cleanly and with an extack message
> as to why some config option fails. Tests should cover the datapath -
> that it works properly when it should and fails cleanly when it should
> not. If addresses are involved in the configuration, then the tests need
> to be written for non VRFs, with VRFs and default VRF since addresses
> are relative.
> 
> Also, in tree test suites are best for the maintenance of this code
> going forward.

I can try to integrate my python test suite into kselftest. It's not a 
very orthodox choice but a rewrite in C would be much larger.

--
Regards,
Leonard