All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
To: Sargun Dhillon <sargun@sargun.me>
Cc: Tycho Andersen <tycho@tycho.ws>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux API <linux-api@vger.kernel.org>,
	Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>,
	Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@ubuntu.com>,
	Aleksa Sarai <cyphar@cyphar.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] samples, selftests/seccomp: Zero out seccomp_notif
Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2019 11:33:31 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <201912301132.5C97DD231B@keescook> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAMp4zn9s1wJyb9xHj4xYL5HTtM=gA07ZfBGTSW5j4ayUzaoZNQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Dec 30, 2019 at 11:14:44AM -0800, Sargun Dhillon wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 28, 2019 at 4:18 PM Tycho Andersen <tycho@tycho.ws> wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, Dec 28, 2019 at 07:10:29PM -0500, Sargun Dhillon wrote:
> > > On Sat, Dec 28, 2019 at 1:18 PM Tycho Andersen <tycho@tycho.ws> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I know it's unrelated, but it's probably worth sending a patch to fix
> > > > this to be sizes.seccomp_notif_resp instead of sizeof(*resp), since if
> > > > the kernel is older this will over-zero things. I can do that, or you
> > > > can add the patch to this series, just let me know which.
> > >
> > > I was thinking about this, and initially, I chose to make the smaller
> > > change. I think it might make more sense to combine the patch,
> > > given that the memset behaviour is "incorrect" if we do it based on
> > > sizeof(*req), or sizeof(*resp).
> > >
> > > I'll go ahead and respin this patch with the change to call memset
> > > based on sizes.
> >
> > I think it would be good to keep it as a separate patch, since it's an
> > unrelated bug fix. That way if we have to revert these because of some
> > breakage, we won't lose the fix.
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Tycho
> 
> As I was doing this, I noticed that the self-tests all use hard-coded struct
> sizes. When I was playing with extending the API, all of a sudden all the
> self-tests started failing (until I recompiled them against newer headers).
> 
> Should we also change the self-tests to operate against the seccomp
> sizes API, or was it intentional for the self-tests hard-coded the struct
> definitions, and locked to the kernel version?

I intend the seccomp selftests to be kernel-version tied, but I'd like
them to fail as gracefully as possible on mismatched kernel versions...

-- 
Kees Cook

      reply	other threads:[~2019-12-30 19:33 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-12-28  1:48 [PATCH v2 1/2] samples, selftests/seccomp: Zero out seccomp_notif Sargun Dhillon
2019-12-28  9:25 ` Christian Brauner
2019-12-28 18:18 ` Tycho Andersen
2019-12-29  0:10   ` Sargun Dhillon
2019-12-29  0:18     ` Tycho Andersen
2019-12-30 19:14       ` Sargun Dhillon
2019-12-30 19:33         ` Kees Cook [this message]

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=201912301132.5C97DD231B@keescook \
    --to=keescook@chromium.org \
    --cc=christian.brauner@ubuntu.com \
    --cc=cyphar@cyphar.com \
    --cc=jannh@google.com \
    --cc=linux-api@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=sargun@sargun.me \
    --cc=tycho@tycho.ws \
    /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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.