From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_GIT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B88B2C10F11 for ; Wed, 24 Apr 2019 16:38:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8494B218B0 for ; Wed, 24 Apr 2019 16:38:18 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=chromium.org header.i=@chromium.org header.b="RBOirwOb" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1732637AbfDXQiH (ORCPT ); Wed, 24 Apr 2019 12:38:07 -0400 Received: from mail-pl1-f193.google.com ([209.85.214.193]:41499 "EHLO mail-pl1-f193.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1732499AbfDXQiG (ORCPT ); Wed, 24 Apr 2019 12:38:06 -0400 Received: by mail-pl1-f193.google.com with SMTP id d9so3630867pls.8 for ; Wed, 24 Apr 2019 09:38:06 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=chromium.org; s=google; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references; bh=yK7KGyF6dcgyF8+VLqnKkfFFI5sTu/wy7hlOVceGxoo=; b=RBOirwOb3Ya7gk2LD0kWtKEUQ22WzVZqXR1xEvR2eCGtH4k8JLwqKMdgxsJYbG6vg7 WTrIghWf3KFQY4HJmf/07OjLu3nz07eZ0B5v/yXzl82fFcvm49lYscFgR+bLBB5wiF5f mQlhjmbSchiELaHYuSL+p1Imw3d2+cwJGUyoI= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to :references; bh=yK7KGyF6dcgyF8+VLqnKkfFFI5sTu/wy7hlOVceGxoo=; b=cUNW7BM2UxkUPAfWeyZV8bO1HRtwwCztYZBncaIpYMvWNTfycGKvtWjh0osWyoiUaT 5a7ev/IEOCRD4B4YS6EQGTSp+xb3EFThiBDhqGPLSPDO6jAMGQYeLFbMdtD+Zc84rfJX E1Ul0bO133xGIeZ6t/j81AOytzPAAVypKbgdRbycU9blYNhWkQy9KZH1iKJMrfte/VOZ wbgyiYowvNYM8tnZQPF08Vg/RJGMVMy1GhLne9k4sRFMYfXvE5B/2wFt6IDaL49j/6Ih Oky8dwPWNYfhVNBgm9t2VINPqDWXM5ypgqJ06wzHX9mw4a+CjHfCSbuVkDfXrPEfKYOD kaWQ== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAV3RyfRsPVJCm3qRfVtWG2MZrnlv9RstDvpM40MZ3rJbpJ1o8y8 HWngkV+oxDPSogyhpSsmP9CKZg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxxzUoDVfNqGEb9wutnoTpRSACF5noWmblLcg/Pb+2utXlEbmvHezmxGwUHOasMGQtVCUCRxw== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:8bc3:: with SMTP id r3mr33857257plo.53.1556123886024; Wed, 24 Apr 2019 09:38:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from www.outflux.net (173-164-112-133-Oregon.hfc.comcastbusiness.net. [173.164.112.133]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id j6sm24688302pfe.107.2019.04.24.09.38.04 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Wed, 24 Apr 2019 09:38:04 -0700 (PDT) From: Kees Cook To: Tycho Andersen Cc: Kees Cook , stable@vger.kernel.org, James Morris , Andy Lutomirski , Will Drewry , linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: [PATCH 1/2] selftests/seccomp: Prepare for exclusive seccomp flags Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2019 09:37:55 -0700 Message-Id: <20190424163756.40001-2-keescook@chromium.org> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.17.1 In-Reply-To: <20190424163756.40001-1-keescook@chromium.org> References: <20190424163756.40001-1-keescook@chromium.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Some seccomp flags will become exclusive, so the selftest needs to be adjusted to mask those out and test them individually for the "all flags" tests. Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # v5.0+ Signed-off-by: Kees Cook --- tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/seccomp_bpf.c | 34 ++++++++++++++----- 1 file changed, 25 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/seccomp_bpf.c b/tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/seccomp_bpf.c index f69d2ee29742..5019cdae5d0b 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/seccomp_bpf.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/seccomp_bpf.c @@ -2166,11 +2166,14 @@ TEST(detect_seccomp_filter_flags) SECCOMP_FILTER_FLAG_LOG, SECCOMP_FILTER_FLAG_SPEC_ALLOW, SECCOMP_FILTER_FLAG_NEW_LISTENER }; - unsigned int flag, all_flags; + unsigned int exclusive[] = { + SECCOMP_FILTER_FLAG_TSYNC, + SECCOMP_FILTER_FLAG_NEW_LISTENER }; + unsigned int flag, all_flags, exclusive_mask; int i; long ret; - /* Test detection of known-good filter flags */ + /* Test detection of individual known-good filter flags */ for (i = 0, all_flags = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(flags); i++) { int bits = 0; @@ -2197,16 +2200,29 @@ TEST(detect_seccomp_filter_flags) all_flags |= flag; } - /* Test detection of all known-good filter flags */ - ret = seccomp(SECCOMP_SET_MODE_FILTER, all_flags, NULL); - EXPECT_EQ(-1, ret); - EXPECT_EQ(EFAULT, errno) { - TH_LOG("Failed to detect that all known-good filter flags (0x%X) are supported!", - all_flags); + /* + * Test detection of all known-good filter flags combined. But + * for the exclusive flags we need to mask them out and try them + * individually for the "all flags" testing. + */ + exclusive_mask = 0; + for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(exclusive); i++) + exclusive_mask |= exclusive[i]; + for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(exclusive); i++) { + flag = all_flags & ~exclusive_mask; + flag |= exclusive[i]; + + ret = seccomp(SECCOMP_SET_MODE_FILTER, flag, NULL); + EXPECT_EQ(-1, ret); + EXPECT_EQ(EFAULT, errno) { + TH_LOG("Failed to detect that all known-good filter flags (0x%X) are supported!", + flag); + } } - /* Test detection of an unknown filter flag */ + /* Test detection of an unknown filter flags, without exclusives. */ flag = -1; + flag &= ~exclusive_mask; ret = seccomp(SECCOMP_SET_MODE_FILTER, flag, NULL); EXPECT_EQ(-1, ret); EXPECT_EQ(EINVAL, errno) { -- 2.17.1