From: Robert Sesek <rsesek@google.com>
To: keescook@chromium.org
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Robert Sesek <rsesek@google.com>
Subject: [PATCH] selftests/seccomp: Be more precise with syscall arguments.
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2015 13:50:22 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1446490222-528-1-git-send-email-rsesek@google.com> (raw)
Certain syscall emulation layers strictly check that the number of
arguments match what the syscall handler expects. The KILL_one_arg_one and
KILL_one_arg_six tests passed more parameters than expected to various
syscalls, causing failures in this emulation mode. Instead, test using
syscalls that take the appropriate number of arguments.
Signed-off-by: Robert Sesek <rsesek@google.com>
---
tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/seccomp_bpf.c | 46 ++++++++++++++++++++-------
1 file changed, 35 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/seccomp_bpf.c b/tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/seccomp_bpf.c
index e7bc5d3..e38cc54 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/seccomp_bpf.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/seccomp/seccomp_bpf.c
@@ -29,6 +29,9 @@
#include <linux/elf.h>
#include <sys/uio.h>
#include <sys/utsname.h>
+#include <sys/fcntl.h>
+#include <sys/mman.h>
+#include <sys/times.h>
#define _GNU_SOURCE
#include <unistd.h>
@@ -429,14 +432,16 @@ TEST_SIGNAL(KILL_one, SIGSYS)
TEST_SIGNAL(KILL_one_arg_one, SIGSYS)
{
+ void *fatal_address;
struct sock_filter filter[] = {
BPF_STMT(BPF_LD|BPF_W|BPF_ABS,
offsetof(struct seccomp_data, nr)),
- BPF_JUMP(BPF_JMP|BPF_JEQ|BPF_K, __NR_getpid, 1, 0),
+ BPF_JUMP(BPF_JMP|BPF_JEQ|BPF_K, __NR_times, 1, 0),
BPF_STMT(BPF_RET|BPF_K, SECCOMP_RET_ALLOW),
/* Only both with lower 32-bit for now. */
BPF_STMT(BPF_LD|BPF_W|BPF_ABS, syscall_arg(0)),
- BPF_JUMP(BPF_JMP|BPF_JEQ|BPF_K, 0x0C0FFEE, 0, 1),
+ BPF_JUMP(BPF_JMP|BPF_JEQ|BPF_K,
+ (unsigned long)&fatal_address, 0, 1),
BPF_STMT(BPF_RET|BPF_K, SECCOMP_RET_KILL),
BPF_STMT(BPF_RET|BPF_K, SECCOMP_RET_ALLOW),
};
@@ -446,7 +451,8 @@ TEST_SIGNAL(KILL_one_arg_one, SIGSYS)
};
long ret;
pid_t parent = getppid();
- pid_t pid = getpid();
+ struct tms timebuf;
+ clock_t clock = times(&timebuf);
ret = prctl(PR_SET_NO_NEW_PRIVS, 1, 0, 0, 0);
ASSERT_EQ(0, ret);
@@ -455,17 +461,22 @@ TEST_SIGNAL(KILL_one_arg_one, SIGSYS)
ASSERT_EQ(0, ret);
EXPECT_EQ(parent, syscall(__NR_getppid));
- EXPECT_EQ(pid, syscall(__NR_getpid));
- /* getpid() should never return. */
- EXPECT_EQ(0, syscall(__NR_getpid, 0x0C0FFEE));
+ EXPECT_LE(clock, syscall(__NR_times, &timebuf));
+ /* times() should never return. */
+ EXPECT_EQ(0, syscall(__NR_times, &fatal_address));
}
TEST_SIGNAL(KILL_one_arg_six, SIGSYS)
{
+#ifndef __NR_mmap2
+ int sysno = __NR_mmap;
+#else
+ int sysno = __NR_mmap2;
+#endif
struct sock_filter filter[] = {
BPF_STMT(BPF_LD|BPF_W|BPF_ABS,
offsetof(struct seccomp_data, nr)),
- BPF_JUMP(BPF_JMP|BPF_JEQ|BPF_K, __NR_getpid, 1, 0),
+ BPF_JUMP(BPF_JMP|BPF_JEQ|BPF_K, sysno, 1, 0),
BPF_STMT(BPF_RET|BPF_K, SECCOMP_RET_ALLOW),
/* Only both with lower 32-bit for now. */
BPF_STMT(BPF_LD|BPF_W|BPF_ABS, syscall_arg(5)),
@@ -479,7 +490,8 @@ TEST_SIGNAL(KILL_one_arg_six, SIGSYS)
};
long ret;
pid_t parent = getppid();
- pid_t pid = getpid();
+ int fd;
+ void *map1, *map2;
ret = prctl(PR_SET_NO_NEW_PRIVS, 1, 0, 0, 0);
ASSERT_EQ(0, ret);
@@ -487,10 +499,22 @@ TEST_SIGNAL(KILL_one_arg_six, SIGSYS)
ret = prctl(PR_SET_SECCOMP, SECCOMP_MODE_FILTER, &prog);
ASSERT_EQ(0, ret);
+ fd = open("/dev/zero", O_RDONLY);
+ ASSERT_NE(-1, fd);
+
EXPECT_EQ(parent, syscall(__NR_getppid));
- EXPECT_EQ(pid, syscall(__NR_getpid));
- /* getpid() should never return. */
- EXPECT_EQ(0, syscall(__NR_getpid, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 0x0C0FFEE));
+ map1 = (void *)syscall(sysno,
+ NULL, PAGE_SIZE, PROT_READ, MAP_PRIVATE, fd, PAGE_SIZE);
+ EXPECT_NE(MAP_FAILED, map1);
+ /* mmap2() should never return. */
+ map2 = (void *)syscall(sysno,
+ NULL, PAGE_SIZE, PROT_READ, MAP_PRIVATE, fd, 0x0C0FFEE);
+ EXPECT_EQ(MAP_FAILED, map2);
+
+ /* The test failed, so clean up the resources. */
+ munmap(map1, PAGE_SIZE);
+ munmap(map2, PAGE_SIZE);
+ close(fd);
}
/* TODO(wad) add 64-bit versus 32-bit arg tests. */
--
2.6.0.rc2.230.g3dd15c0
next reply other threads:[~2015-11-02 18:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-11-02 18:50 Robert Sesek [this message]
2015-11-02 19:49 ` [PATCH] selftests/seccomp: Be more precise with syscall arguments Kees Cook
2015-11-02 20:09 ` Shuah Khan
2015-11-02 20:32 ` Robert Sesek
2015-11-02 21:43 ` Shuah Khan
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=1446490222-528-1-git-send-email-rsesek@google.com \
--to=rsesek@google.com \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.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