netdev - Re: [PATCH bpf 2/2] bpf: sockmap, test for unconnected af

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, 01 Dec 2023 10:39:20 +0100
From: Jakub Sitnicki <jakub@...udflare.com>
To: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>
Cc: kuniyu@...zon.com, edumazet@...gle.com, bpf@...r.kernel.org,
 netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf 2/2] bpf: sockmap, test for unconnected af_unix sock

On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 07:23 PM -08, John Fastabend wrote:
> Add test to sockmap_basic to ensure af_unix sockets that are not connected
> can not be added to the map. Ensure we keep DGRAM sockets working however
> as these will not be connected typically.
>
> Signed-off-by: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>
> ---
>  .../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/sockmap_basic.c  | 34 +++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 34 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/sockmap_basic.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/sockmap_basic.c
> index f75f84d0b3d7..ad96f4422def 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/sockmap_basic.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/sockmap_basic.c
> @@ -524,6 +524,37 @@ static void test_sockmap_skb_verdict_peek(void)
>  	test_sockmap_pass_prog__destroy(pass);
>  }
>  
> +static void test_sockmap_unconnected_unix(void)
> +{
> +	int err, map, stream = 0, dgram = 0, zero = 0;
> +	struct test_sockmap_pass_prog *skel;
> +
> +	skel = test_sockmap_pass_prog__open_and_load();
> +	if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(skel, "open_and_load"))
> +		return;
> +
> +	map = bpf_map__fd(skel->maps.sock_map_rx);
> +
> +	stream = xsocket(AF_UNIX, SOCK_STREAM, 0);
> +	if (!ASSERT_GT(stream, -1, "socket(AF_UNIX, SOCK_STREAM)"))
> +		return;

Isn't it redudant to use both the xsocket wrapper and ASSERT_* macro?
Or is there some debugging value that comes from that, which I missed?

> +
> +	dgram = xsocket(AF_UNIX, SOCK_DGRAM, 0);
> +	if (!ASSERT_GT(dgram, -1, "socket(AF_UNIX, SOCK_DGRAM)")) {
> +		close(stream);
> +		return;
> +	}
> +
> +	err = bpf_map_update_elem(map, &zero, &stream, BPF_ANY);
> +	ASSERT_ERR(err, "bpf_map_update_elem(stream)");
> +
> +	err = bpf_map_update_elem(map, &zero, &dgram, BPF_ANY);
> +	ASSERT_OK(err, "bpf_map_update_elem(dgram)");
> +
> +	close(stream);
> +	close(dgram);
> +}
> +
>  void test_sockmap_basic(void)
>  {
>  	if (test__start_subtest("sockmap create_update_free"))
> @@ -566,4 +597,7 @@ void test_sockmap_basic(void)
>  		test_sockmap_skb_verdict_fionread(false);
>  	if (test__start_subtest("sockmap skb_verdict msg_f_peek"))
>  		test_sockmap_skb_verdict_peek();
> +
> +	if (test__start_subtest("sockmap unconnected af_unix"))
> +		test_sockmap_unconnected_unix();
>  }