netdev - Re: [RFC PATCH v4 00/15] Landlock LSM

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 Mar 2022 18:55:46 +0300
From:   Konstantin Meskhidze <konstantin.meskhidze@...wei.com>
To:     Mickaël Salaün <mic@...ikod.net>
CC:     <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>,
        <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        <netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org>, <yusongping@...wei.com>,
        <artem.kuzin@...wei.com>, <anton.sirazetdinov@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v4 00/15] Landlock LSM



3/17/2022 8:26 PM, Mickaël Salaün пишет:
> 
> On 17/03/2022 14:01, Konstantin Meskhidze wrote:
>>
>>
>> 3/15/2022 8:02 PM, Mickaël Salaün пишет:
>>> Hi Konstantin,
>>>
>>> This series looks good! Thanks for the split in multiple patches.
>>>
>>   Thanks. I follow your recommendations.
>>>
>>> On 09/03/2022 14:44, Konstantin Meskhidze wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>> This is a new V4 bunch of RFC patches related to Landlock LSM 
>>>> network confinement.
>>>> It brings deep refactirong and commit splitting of previous version V3.
>>>> Also added additional selftests.
>>>>
>>>> This patch series can be applied on top of v5.17-rc3.
>>>>
>>>> All test were run in QEMU evironment and compiled with
>>>>   -static flag.
>>>>   1. network_test: 9/9 tests passed.
>>>
>>> I get a kernel warning running the network tests.
>>
>>    What kind of warning? Can you provide it please?
> 
> You really need to get a setup that gives you such kernel warning. When 
> running network_test you should get:
> WARNING: CPU: 3 PID: 742 at security/landlock/ruleset.c:218 
> insert_rule+0x220/0x270
> 
> Before sending new patches, please make sure you're able to catch such 
> issues.
> 
   Thanks. I will check it.
> 
>>>
>>>>   2. base_test: 8/8 tests passed.
>>>>   3. fs_test: 46/46 tests passed.
>>>>   4. ptrace_test: 4/8 tests passed.
>>>
>>> Does your test machine use Yama? That would explain the 4/8. You can 
>>> disable it with the appropriate sysctl.
> 
> Can you answer this question?

   Sorry. I missed it.
   I checked config - Yama is supported now. I will disable it.
   Thanks for advice.
> 
> 
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Tests were also launched for Landlock version without
>>>> v4 patch:
>>>>   1. base_test: 8/8 tests passed.
>>>>   2. fs_test: 46/46 tests passed.
>>>>   3. ptrace_test: 4/8 tests passed.
>>>>
>>>> Could not provide test coverage cause had problems with tests
>>>> on VM (no -static flag the tests compiling, no v4 patch applied):
>>>
>>> You can build statically-linked tests with:
>>> make -C tools/testing/selftests/landlock CFLAGS=-static
>>
>>   Ok. I will try. Thanks.
>>>
>>>> 1. base_test: 7/8 tests passed.
>>>>   Error:
>>>>   # Starting 8 tests from 1 test cases.
>>>>   #  RUN           global.inconsistent_attr ...
>>>>   # base_test.c:51:inconsistent_attr:Expected ENOMSG (42) == errno (22)
>>>
>>> This looks like a bug in the syscall argument checks.
>>
>>    This bug I just get when don't use -static option. With -static 
>> base test passes 8/8.
> 
> Weird, I'd like to know what is the cause of this issue. What disto and 
> version do you use as host and guest VM? Do you have some warning when 
> compiling?
   I run tests on host Ubuntu 20.04.3 LTS, kernel version  v5.17. I will 
check more carefuly for compiling warnings.
> .