All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Andrea Cervesato" <andrea.cervesato@suse.com>
To: "Petr Vorel" <pvorel@suse.cz>, <ltp@lists.linux.it>
Cc: <linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH] ima_violations.sh: Another fix of condition evaluation
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2025 09:50:43 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <DEW3YDE8MMBT.DEEW2VO31X0G@suse.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20251211111046.87297-1-pvorel@suse.cz>

Hi!

On Thu Dec 11, 2025 at 12:10 PM CET, Petr Vorel wrote:
> c0c35509f9 was not enough to fix evaluation against empty
> $expected_violations:
>
> ima_violations 1 TINFO: verify open writers violation
> /opt/ltp/testcases/bin/ima_violations.sh: line 96: [: 0: unary operator expected
>
> Therefore split checks into two if.
>
> Also improvements (readability)
> * shorten line length with saving subtraction into variable
> * evaluate empty variable with ${:-}
>
> Fixes: 726ed71905 ("ima_violations.sh: Update validate() to support multiple violations")
> Reported-by: Martin Doucha <mdoucha@suse.cz>
> Signed-off-by: Petr Vorel <pvorel@suse.cz>
> ---
> NOTE: this was found on old SLES 4.4 based kernel which does not log
> validations. But missing validations might be just a Secure Boot related
> setup problem:
>
> $ mokutil --sb-state
> Secure Boot: EFI variables not supported on SUT
>
> Events are logged when Secure Boot is off:
> $ mokutil --sb-state
> SecureBoot disabled
>
> Or maybe violations worked differently on the old kernel (I remember
> only 6.15 change).
>
> Kind regards,
> Petr
>
>  .../integrity/ima/tests/ima_violations.sh     | 21 ++++++++++++-------
>  1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/testcases/kernel/security/integrity/ima/tests/ima_violations.sh b/testcases/kernel/security/integrity/ima/tests/ima_violations.sh
> index 1d2f1d9447..a8476e6b59 100755
> --- a/testcases/kernel/security/integrity/ima/tests/ima_violations.sh
> +++ b/testcases/kernel/security/integrity/ima/tests/ima_violations.sh
> @@ -87,23 +87,30 @@ validate()
>  	local search="$3"
>  	local expected_violations="$4"
>  	local max_attempt=3
> -	local count2 i num_violations_new
> +	local count2 diff i num_violations_new pass
>  
>  	for i in $(seq 1 $max_attempt); do
>  		read num_violations_new < $IMA_VIOLATIONS
>  		count2="$(get_count $search)"
> -		if [ -z "$expected_violations" -a $(($num_violations_new - $num_violations)) -gt 0 ] || \
> -		   [ $(($num_violations_new - $num_violations)) -eq $expected_violations ]; then
> -			[ -z "$expected_violations" ] && expected_violations=1
> +		diff=$(($num_violations_new - $num_violations))
> +
> +		if [ "$expected_violations" ] && [ $diff -eq $expected_violations ]; then
> +			pass=1
> +		fi
> +		if [ -z "$expected_violations" ] && [ $diff -gt 0 ]; then
> +			pass=1
> +		fi

Maybe readability can be improved (well..shell scripts are pretty ugly
by nature anyway):

	diff=$((num_violations_new - num_violations))

	if [ "$expected_violations" ]; then
		[ $diff -eq $expected_violations ] && pass=1
	else
		[ $diff -gt 0 ] && pass=1
	fi

> +
> +		if [ "$pass" = 1 ]; then
>  			if [ $count2 -gt $count ]; then
> -				tst_res TPASS "$expected_violations $search violation(s) added"
> +				tst_res TPASS "${expected_violations:-1} $search violation(s) added"
>  				return
>  			else
>  				tst_res TINFO "$search not found in $LOG ($i/$max_attempt attempt)..."
>  				tst_sleep 1s
>  			fi
> -		elif [ $(($num_violations_new - $num_violations)) -gt 0 ]; then
> -			tst_res $IMA_FAIL "$search too many violations added: $num_violations_new - $num_violations"
> +		elif [ $diff -gt 0 ]; then
> +			tst_res $IMA_FAIL "$search too many violations added: $diff ($num_violations_new - $num_violations)"
>  			return
>  		else
>  			tst_res $IMA_FAIL "$search violation not added"

-- 
Andrea Cervesato
SUSE QE Automation Engineer Linux
andrea.cervesato@suse.com


WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Andrea Cervesato via ltp <ltp@lists.linux.it>
To: "Petr Vorel" <pvorel@suse.cz>, <ltp@lists.linux.it>
Cc: linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH] ima_violations.sh: Another fix of condition evaluation
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2025 09:50:43 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <DEW3YDE8MMBT.DEEW2VO31X0G@suse.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20251211111046.87297-1-pvorel@suse.cz>

Hi!

On Thu Dec 11, 2025 at 12:10 PM CET, Petr Vorel wrote:
> c0c35509f9 was not enough to fix evaluation against empty
> $expected_violations:
>
> ima_violations 1 TINFO: verify open writers violation
> /opt/ltp/testcases/bin/ima_violations.sh: line 96: [: 0: unary operator expected
>
> Therefore split checks into two if.
>
> Also improvements (readability)
> * shorten line length with saving subtraction into variable
> * evaluate empty variable with ${:-}
>
> Fixes: 726ed71905 ("ima_violations.sh: Update validate() to support multiple violations")
> Reported-by: Martin Doucha <mdoucha@suse.cz>
> Signed-off-by: Petr Vorel <pvorel@suse.cz>
> ---
> NOTE: this was found on old SLES 4.4 based kernel which does not log
> validations. But missing validations might be just a Secure Boot related
> setup problem:
>
> $ mokutil --sb-state
> Secure Boot: EFI variables not supported on SUT
>
> Events are logged when Secure Boot is off:
> $ mokutil --sb-state
> SecureBoot disabled
>
> Or maybe violations worked differently on the old kernel (I remember
> only 6.15 change).
>
> Kind regards,
> Petr
>
>  .../integrity/ima/tests/ima_violations.sh     | 21 ++++++++++++-------
>  1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/testcases/kernel/security/integrity/ima/tests/ima_violations.sh b/testcases/kernel/security/integrity/ima/tests/ima_violations.sh
> index 1d2f1d9447..a8476e6b59 100755
> --- a/testcases/kernel/security/integrity/ima/tests/ima_violations.sh
> +++ b/testcases/kernel/security/integrity/ima/tests/ima_violations.sh
> @@ -87,23 +87,30 @@ validate()
>  	local search="$3"
>  	local expected_violations="$4"
>  	local max_attempt=3
> -	local count2 i num_violations_new
> +	local count2 diff i num_violations_new pass
>  
>  	for i in $(seq 1 $max_attempt); do
>  		read num_violations_new < $IMA_VIOLATIONS
>  		count2="$(get_count $search)"
> -		if [ -z "$expected_violations" -a $(($num_violations_new - $num_violations)) -gt 0 ] || \
> -		   [ $(($num_violations_new - $num_violations)) -eq $expected_violations ]; then
> -			[ -z "$expected_violations" ] && expected_violations=1
> +		diff=$(($num_violations_new - $num_violations))
> +
> +		if [ "$expected_violations" ] && [ $diff -eq $expected_violations ]; then
> +			pass=1
> +		fi
> +		if [ -z "$expected_violations" ] && [ $diff -gt 0 ]; then
> +			pass=1
> +		fi

Maybe readability can be improved (well..shell scripts are pretty ugly
by nature anyway):

	diff=$((num_violations_new - num_violations))

	if [ "$expected_violations" ]; then
		[ $diff -eq $expected_violations ] && pass=1
	else
		[ $diff -gt 0 ] && pass=1
	fi

> +
> +		if [ "$pass" = 1 ]; then
>  			if [ $count2 -gt $count ]; then
> -				tst_res TPASS "$expected_violations $search violation(s) added"
> +				tst_res TPASS "${expected_violations:-1} $search violation(s) added"
>  				return
>  			else
>  				tst_res TINFO "$search not found in $LOG ($i/$max_attempt attempt)..."
>  				tst_sleep 1s
>  			fi
> -		elif [ $(($num_violations_new - $num_violations)) -gt 0 ]; then
> -			tst_res $IMA_FAIL "$search too many violations added: $num_violations_new - $num_violations"
> +		elif [ $diff -gt 0 ]; then
> +			tst_res $IMA_FAIL "$search too many violations added: $diff ($num_violations_new - $num_violations)"
>  			return
>  		else
>  			tst_res $IMA_FAIL "$search violation not added"

-- 
Andrea Cervesato
SUSE QE Automation Engineer Linux
andrea.cervesato@suse.com


-- 
Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp

  parent reply	other threads:[~2025-12-12  8:50 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-12-11 11:10 [PATCH] ima_violations.sh: Another fix of condition evaluation Petr Vorel
2025-12-11 11:10 ` [LTP] " Petr Vorel
2025-12-12  3:42 ` Mimi Zohar
2025-12-12  3:42   ` [LTP] " Mimi Zohar
2025-12-17 14:25   ` Petr Vorel
2025-12-17 14:25     ` [LTP] " Petr Vorel
2025-12-12  8:50 ` Andrea Cervesato [this message]
2025-12-12  8:50   ` Andrea Cervesato via ltp
2025-12-12 11:20   ` Petr Vorel
2025-12-12 11:20     ` Petr Vorel

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=DEW3YDE8MMBT.DEEW2VO31X0G@suse.com \
    --to=andrea.cervesato@suse.com \
    --cc=linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=ltp@lists.linux.it \
    --cc=pvorel@suse.cz \
    /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.