From: "Mickaël Salaün" <mic@digikod.net>
To: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Cc: "James Morris" <jmorris@namei.org>,
"Jann Horn" <jannh@google.com>,
"Serge E . Hallyn" <serge@hallyn.com>,
"Al Viro" <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
"Andrew Morton" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"Andy Lutomirski" <luto@amacapital.net>,
"Anton Ivanov" <anton.ivanov@cambridgegreys.com>,
"Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@arndb.de>,
"Casey Schaufler" <casey@schaufler-ca.com>,
"David Howells" <dhowells@redhat.com>,
"Jeff Dike" <jdike@addtoit.com>,
"Jonathan Corbet" <corbet@lwn.net>,
"Michael Kerrisk" <mtk.manpages@gmail.com>,
"Richard Weinberger" <richard@nod.at>,
"Shuah Khan" <shuah@kernel.org>,
"Vincent Dagonneau" <vincent.dagonneau@ssi.gouv.fr>,
kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com, linux-api@vger.kernel.org,
linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org,
linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org,
"Mickaël Salaün" <mic@linux.microsoft.com>,
"Dmitry Vyukov" <dvyukov@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v30 10/12] selftests/landlock: Add user space tests
Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2021 22:57:59 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1b043379-b6eb-d272-c9b9-25c6960e1ef1@digikod.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <202103191207.E12FD4E51@keescook>
On 19/03/2021 20:11, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 19, 2021 at 07:41:00PM +0100, Mickaël Salaün wrote:
>>
>> On 19/03/2021 18:56, Kees Cook wrote:
>>> On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 09:42:50PM +0100, Mickaël Salaün wrote:
>>>> From: Mickaël Salaün <mic@linux.microsoft.com>
>>>>
>>>> Test all Landlock system calls, ptrace hooks semantic and filesystem
>>>> access-control with multiple layouts.
>>>>
>>>> Test coverage for security/landlock/ is 93.6% of lines. The code not
>>>> covered only deals with internal kernel errors (e.g. memory allocation)
>>>> and race conditions.
>>>>
>>>> Cc: James Morris <jmorris@namei.org>
>>>> Cc: Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>
>>>> Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
>>>> Cc: Serge E. Hallyn <serge@hallyn.com>
>>>> Cc: Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Mickaël Salaün <mic@linux.microsoft.com>
>>>> Reviewed-by: Vincent Dagonneau <vincent.dagonneau@ssi.gouv.fr>
>>>> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210316204252.427806-11-mic@digikod.net
>>>
>>> This is terrific. I love the coverage. How did you measure this, BTW?
>>
>> I used gcov: https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/dev-tools/gcov.html
>>
>>> To increase it into memory allocation failures, have you tried
>>> allocation fault injection:
>>> https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/fault-injection/fault-injection.html
>>
>> Yes, it is used by syzkaller, but I don't know how to extract this
>> specific coverage.
>>
>>>
>>>> [...]
>>>> +TEST(inconsistent_attr) {
>>>> + const long page_size = sysconf(_SC_PAGESIZE);
>>>> + char *const buf = malloc(page_size + 1);
>>>> + struct landlock_ruleset_attr *const ruleset_attr = (void *)buf;
>>>> +
>>>> + ASSERT_NE(NULL, buf);
>>>> +
>>>> + /* Checks copy_from_user(). */
>>>> + ASSERT_EQ(-1, landlock_create_ruleset(ruleset_attr, 0, 0));
>>>> + /* The size if less than sizeof(struct landlock_attr_enforce). */
>>>> + ASSERT_EQ(EINVAL, errno);
>>>> + ASSERT_EQ(-1, landlock_create_ruleset(ruleset_attr, 1, 0));
>>>> + ASSERT_EQ(EINVAL, errno);
>>>
>>> Almost everywhere you're using ASSERT instead of EXPECT. Is this correct
>>> (in the sense than as soon as an ASSERT fails the rest of the test is
>>> skipped)? I do see you using EXPECT is some places, but I figured I'd
>>> ask about the intention here.
>>
>> I intentionally use ASSERT as much as possible, but I use EXPECT when an
>> error could block a test or when it could stop a cleanup (i.e. teardown).
>
> Okay. Does the test suite run sanely when landlock is missing from the
> kernel?
When Landlock is disabled, the tests fail but do not hang.
>
>>>
>>>> +/*
>>>> + * TEST_F_FORK() is useful when a test drop privileges but the corresponding
>>>> + * FIXTURE_TEARDOWN() requires them (e.g. to remove files from a directory
>>>> + * where write actions are denied). For convenience, FIXTURE_TEARDOWN() is
>>>> + * also called when the test failed, but not when FIXTURE_SETUP() failed. For
>>>> + * this to be possible, we must not call abort() but instead exit smoothly
>>>> + * (hence the step print).
>>>> + */
>>>
>>> Hm, interesting. I think this should be extracted into a separate patch
>>> and added to the test harness proper.
>>
>> I agree, but it may require some modifications to fit nicely in
>> kselftest_harness.h . For now, it works well for my use case. I'll send
>> patches once Landlock is merged. In fact, I already made
>> kselftest_harness.h available for other users than seccomp. ;)
>
> Fair points.
>
>>>
>>> Could this be solved with TEARDOWN being called on SETUP failure?
>>
>> The goal of this helper is to still be able to call TEARDOWN when TEST
>> failed, not SETUP.
>>
>>>
>>>> +#define TEST_F_FORK(fixture_name, test_name) \
>>>> + static void fixture_name##_##test_name##_child( \
>>>> + struct __test_metadata *_metadata, \
>>>> + FIXTURE_DATA(fixture_name) *self, \
>>>> + const FIXTURE_VARIANT(fixture_name) *variant); \
>>>> + TEST_F(fixture_name, test_name) \
>>>> + { \
>>>> + int status; \
>>>> + const pid_t child = fork(); \
>>>> + if (child < 0) \
>>>> + abort(); \
>>>> + if (child == 0) { \
>>>> + _metadata->no_print = 1; \
>>>> + fixture_name##_##test_name##_child(_metadata, self, variant); \
>>>> + if (_metadata->skip) \
>>>> + _exit(255); \
>>>> + if (_metadata->passed) \
>>>> + _exit(0); \
>>>> + _exit(_metadata->step); \
>>>> + } \
>>>> + if (child != waitpid(child, &status, 0)) \
>>>> + abort(); \
>>>> + if (WIFSIGNALED(status) || !WIFEXITED(status)) { \
>>>> + _metadata->passed = 0; \
>>>> + _metadata->step = 1; \
>>>> + return; \
>>>> + } \
>>>> + switch (WEXITSTATUS(status)) { \
>>>> + case 0: \
>>>> + _metadata->passed = 1; \
>>>> + break; \
>>>> + case 255: \
>>>> + _metadata->passed = 1; \
>>>> + _metadata->skip = 1; \
>>>> + break; \
>>>> + default: \
>>>> + _metadata->passed = 0; \
>>>> + _metadata->step = WEXITSTATUS(status); \
>>>> + break; \
>>>> + } \
>>>> + } \
>>>
>>> This looks like a subset of __wait_for_test()? Could __TEST_F_IMPL() be
>>> updated instead to do this? (Though the fork overhead might not be great
>>> for everyone.)
>>
>> Yes, it will probably be my approach to update kselftest_harness.h .
>
> It seems like this would be named better as TEST_DROPS_PRIVS or something,
> which describes the reason for the fork.
Yeah, maybe, we could discuss about that in a dedicated patch series. :)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-03-19 21:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 49+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-03-16 20:42 [PATCH v30 00/12] Landlock LSM Mickaël Salaün
2021-03-16 20:42 ` [PATCH v30 01/12] landlock: Add object management Mickaël Salaün
2021-03-19 18:13 ` Kees Cook
2021-03-19 18:57 ` Mickaël Salaün
2021-03-16 20:42 ` [PATCH v30 02/12] landlock: Add ruleset and domain management Mickaël Salaün
2021-03-19 18:40 ` Kees Cook
2021-03-19 19:03 ` Mickaël Salaün
2021-03-19 19:15 ` Kees Cook
2021-03-24 20:31 ` James Morris
2021-03-25 9:29 ` Mickaël Salaün
2021-03-23 0:13 ` Jann Horn
2021-03-16 20:42 ` [PATCH v30 03/12] landlock: Set up the security framework and manage credentials Mickaël Salaün
2021-03-19 18:45 ` Kees Cook
2021-03-19 19:07 ` Mickaël Salaün
2021-03-16 20:42 ` [PATCH v30 04/12] landlock: Add ptrace restrictions Mickaël Salaün
2021-03-19 18:45 ` Kees Cook
2021-03-16 20:42 ` [PATCH v30 05/12] LSM: Infrastructure management of the superblock Mickaël Salaün
2021-03-19 17:24 ` Kees Cook
2021-03-16 20:42 ` [PATCH v30 06/12] fs,security: Add sb_delete hook Mickaël Salaün
2021-03-19 17:24 ` Kees Cook
2021-03-16 20:42 ` [PATCH v30 07/12] landlock: Support filesystem access-control Mickaël Salaün
2021-03-18 23:10 ` James Morris
2021-03-19 18:57 ` Kees Cook
2021-03-19 19:19 ` Mickaël Salaün
2021-03-23 19:30 ` Mickaël Salaün
2021-03-23 0:13 ` Jann Horn
2021-03-23 15:55 ` Mickaël Salaün
2021-03-23 17:49 ` Jann Horn
2021-03-23 19:22 ` Mickaël Salaün
2021-03-24 3:10 ` Jann Horn
2021-03-16 20:42 ` [PATCH v30 08/12] landlock: Add syscall implementations Mickaël Salaün
2021-03-19 19:06 ` Kees Cook
2021-03-19 21:53 ` Mickaël Salaün
2021-03-24 15:03 ` Mickaël Salaün
2021-03-16 20:42 ` [PATCH v30 09/12] arch: Wire up Landlock syscalls Mickaël Salaün
2021-03-16 20:42 ` [PATCH v30 10/12] selftests/landlock: Add user space tests Mickaël Salaün
2021-03-19 17:56 ` Kees Cook
2021-03-19 18:41 ` Mickaël Salaün
2021-03-19 19:11 ` Kees Cook
2021-03-19 21:57 ` Mickaël Salaün [this message]
2021-03-16 20:42 ` [PATCH v30 11/12] samples/landlock: Add a sandbox manager example Mickaël Salaün
2021-03-19 17:26 ` Kees Cook
2021-03-16 20:42 ` [PATCH v30 12/12] landlock: Add user and kernel documentation Mickaël Salaün
2021-03-19 18:03 ` Kees Cook
2021-03-19 18:54 ` Mickaël Salaün
2021-03-23 19:25 ` Mickaël Salaün
2021-03-24 16:21 ` Mickaël Salaün
2021-03-18 23:26 ` [PATCH v30 00/12] Landlock LSM James Morris
2021-03-19 15:52 ` Mickaël Salaün
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1b043379-b6eb-d272-c9b9-25c6960e1ef1@digikod.net \
--to=mic@digikod.net \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=anton.ivanov@cambridgegreys.com \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=casey@schaufler-ca.com \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=dvyukov@google.com \
--cc=jannh@google.com \
--cc=jdike@addtoit.com \
--cc=jmorris@namei.org \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com \
--cc=linux-api@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luto@amacapital.net \
--cc=mic@linux.microsoft.com \
--cc=mtk.manpages@gmail.com \
--cc=richard@nod.at \
--cc=serge@hallyn.com \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=vincent.dagonneau@ssi.gouv.fr \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).