From: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
To: kernel test robot <rong.a.chen@intel.com>
Cc: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>,
Eric Biggers <ebiggers3@gmail.com>,
Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, linux-api@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, lkp@lists.01.org,
ltp@lists.linux.it
Subject: Re: [exec] 166d03c9ec: ltp.execveat02.fail
Date: Thu, 4 Jun 2020 15:45:46 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <202006041542.0720CB7A@keescook> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200525091420.GI12456@shao2-debian>
On Mon, May 25, 2020 at 05:14:20PM +0800, kernel test robot wrote:
> Greeting,
(Whoops, I missed this in my inbox.)
> <<<test_start>>>
> tag=execveat02 stime=1590373229
> cmdline="execveat02"
> contacts=""
> analysis=exit
> <<<test_output>>>
> tst_test.c:1246: INFO: Timeout per run is 0h 05m 00s
> execveat02.c:64: PASS: execveat() fails as expected: EBADF (9)
> execveat02.c:64: PASS: execveat() fails as expected: EINVAL (22)
> execveat02.c:61: FAIL: execveat() fails unexpectedly, expected: ELOOP: EACCES (13)
> execveat02.c:64: PASS: execveat() fails as expected: ENOTDIR (20)
I will go check on this. Looking at the expected result (ELOOP) I think
this just means the test needs adjustment because it's trying to
double-check for a pathological case, but it seems their test setup
trips the (now earlier) IS_SREG() test. But I'll double-check and report
back!
--
Kees Cook
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
To: ltp@lists.linux.it
Subject: [LTP] [exec] 166d03c9ec: ltp.execveat02.fail
Date: Thu, 4 Jun 2020 15:45:46 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <202006041542.0720CB7A@keescook> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200525091420.GI12456@shao2-debian>
On Mon, May 25, 2020 at 05:14:20PM +0800, kernel test robot wrote:
> Greeting,
(Whoops, I missed this in my inbox.)
> <<<test_start>>>
> tag=execveat02 stime=1590373229
> cmdline="execveat02"
> contacts=""
> analysis=exit
> <<<test_output>>>
> tst_test.c:1246: INFO: Timeout per run is 0h 05m 00s
> execveat02.c:64: PASS: execveat() fails as expected: EBADF (9)
> execveat02.c:64: PASS: execveat() fails as expected: EINVAL (22)
> execveat02.c:61: FAIL: execveat() fails unexpectedly, expected: ELOOP: EACCES (13)
> execveat02.c:64: PASS: execveat() fails as expected: ENOTDIR (20)
I will go check on this. Looking at the expected result (ELOOP) I think
this just means the test needs adjustment because it's trying to
double-check for a pathological case, but it seems their test setup
trips the (now earlier) IS_SREG() test. But I'll double-check and report
back!
--
Kees Cook
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
To: lkp@lists.01.org
Subject: Re: [exec] 166d03c9ec: ltp.execveat02.fail
Date: Thu, 04 Jun 2020 15:45:46 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <202006041542.0720CB7A@keescook> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200525091420.GI12456@shao2-debian>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 907 bytes --]
On Mon, May 25, 2020 at 05:14:20PM +0800, kernel test robot wrote:
> Greeting,
(Whoops, I missed this in my inbox.)
> <<<test_start>>>
> tag=execveat02 stime=1590373229
> cmdline="execveat02"
> contacts=""
> analysis=exit
> <<<test_output>>>
> tst_test.c:1246: INFO: Timeout per run is 0h 05m 00s
> execveat02.c:64: PASS: execveat() fails as expected: EBADF (9)
> execveat02.c:64: PASS: execveat() fails as expected: EINVAL (22)
> execveat02.c:61: FAIL: execveat() fails unexpectedly, expected: ELOOP: EACCES (13)
> execveat02.c:64: PASS: execveat() fails as expected: ENOTDIR (20)
I will go check on this. Looking at the expected result (ELOOP) I think
this just means the test needs adjustment because it's trying to
double-check for a pathological case, but it seems their test setup
trips the (now earlier) IS_SREG() test. But I'll double-check and report
back!
--
Kees Cook
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-06-04 22:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-05-18 5:54 [PATCH 0/4] Relocate execve() sanity checks Kees Cook
2020-05-18 5:54 ` [PATCH 1/4] exec: Change uselib(2) IS_SREG() failure to EACCES Kees Cook
2020-05-18 13:02 ` Christian Brauner
2020-05-18 14:43 ` Jann Horn
2020-05-18 14:46 ` Christian Brauner
2020-05-18 23:57 ` Eric W. Biederman
2020-05-19 8:11 ` Christian Brauner
2020-05-19 8:37 ` Andreas Schwab
2020-05-19 11:56 ` Eric W. Biederman
2020-05-19 12:12 ` Andreas Schwab
2020-05-19 12:28 ` Eric W. Biederman
2020-05-19 13:29 ` Christian Brauner
2020-05-19 14:49 ` Eric W. Biederman
2020-05-19 13:13 ` Christian Brauner
2020-05-19 14:32 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2020-05-19 14:47 ` Christian Brauner
2020-05-18 5:54 ` [PATCH 2/4] exec: Relocate S_ISREG() check Kees Cook
2020-05-25 9:14 ` [LTP] [exec] 166d03c9ec: ltp.execveat02.fail kernel test robot
2020-05-25 9:14 ` kernel test robot
2020-06-04 22:45 ` Kees Cook [this message]
2020-06-04 22:45 ` Kees Cook
2020-06-04 22:45 ` [LTP] " Kees Cook
2020-06-05 2:57 ` Kees Cook
2020-06-05 2:57 ` Kees Cook
2020-06-05 2:57 ` [LTP] " Kees Cook
2020-05-18 5:54 ` [PATCH 3/4] exec: Relocate path_noexec() check Kees Cook
2020-05-18 5:54 ` [PATCH 4/4] fs: Include FMODE_EXEC when converting flags to f_mode Kees Cook
2020-05-19 15:06 ` [PATCH 0/4] Relocate execve() sanity checks Eric W. Biederman
2020-05-19 16:26 ` Kees Cook
2020-05-19 17:41 ` Eric W. Biederman
2020-05-19 17:56 ` Kees Cook
2020-05-19 18:42 ` Eric W. Biederman
2020-05-19 21:17 ` Kees Cook
2020-05-19 22:58 ` John Johansen
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=202006041542.0720CB7A@keescook \
--to=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dvyukov@google.com \
--cc=ebiggers3@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-api@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lkp@lists.01.org \
--cc=ltp@lists.linux.it \
--cc=penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp \
--cc=rong.a.chen@intel.com \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/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.