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=-3.9 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no 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 79B2FC433E2 for ; Fri, 10 Jul 2020 22:52:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F83F206E2 for ; Fri, 10 Jul 2020 22:52:43 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=chromium.org header.i=@chromium.org header.b="FjiqjH9k" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726581AbgGJWwm (ORCPT ); Fri, 10 Jul 2020 18:52:42 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:36942 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726262AbgGJWwl (ORCPT ); Fri, 10 Jul 2020 18:52:41 -0400 Received: from mail-pl1-x642.google.com (mail-pl1-x642.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::642]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 814D7C08C5DC for ; Fri, 10 Jul 2020 15:52:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pl1-x642.google.com with SMTP id x8so2830753plm.10 for ; Fri, 10 Jul 2020 15:52:41 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=chromium.org; s=google; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=gX6YgcMfSykw3J9R6ZTzJu/j6sgShmyRfXIsXkOHBlY=; b=FjiqjH9k77nNIvYx9JltNxNXqW1sklSIL+l3o/ZEJWxqMRU22TIW5BUVRtBVPVWYO0 ZpIEamJ/+0PlfnjjMLwhgX+EGHduhPTT4EawVUVRNNpCyc4jGxS7RiaXGoEHef8Xwbqn cSDqyCEeHG6PNgkWHan8+RKDP6XgPY2cGnGGI= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=gX6YgcMfSykw3J9R6ZTzJu/j6sgShmyRfXIsXkOHBlY=; b=e6QTtxWcq0R+KJWcv/o7AlYOLTT/8crYZSgP/s0aFi9wzTmljviRLWN2YK65GfNLsi WykkkkSqIpXuCbs5b5RQ9EJCuRwW65nPuxTrx6zIWzEjjNb6AzoF2gGzukKuuCssalSb NBOooTrn0JmBckylopP9Y++/S35eCAOAO9BOs4M+PE6FUNQEM89vlsdR681d3ULzM48F wOC8Y8MfqpljP7A98Qa2HBPZ2tveyOxhUcb3a5ER985vhc78Ldq88KtZ+8i+0W7ZLXZt EjmYUKzzGF1OHByNG2OuoQE57qdXY6pq2R0Lvy4g+Zo8bJA1a9cLZRPpuMhAZ3tJrU4D GTfQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531hTo37T2NnzWS960HHBr4ytX/MacL85hi0LP/1rCxHXB2ifSCO TO/29rgihoZtKPcoRJk2dVxsZg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyjD+MX9/tUbhYu/hHqC62kKTUtC0c5Keo979l3OQm7+syZHI2OCgg9mIAvOjzRnLigqpYaTw== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:6b87:: with SMTP id p7mr56254761plk.275.1594421561099; Fri, 10 Jul 2020 15:52:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from www.outflux.net (smtp.outflux.net. [198.145.64.163]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id f207sm7340205pfa.107.2020.07.10.15.52.39 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 10 Jul 2020 15:52:39 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2020 15:52:38 -0700 From: Kees Cook To: Tycho Andersen Cc: Will Deacon , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH for-next/seccomp 1/2] selftests/seccomp: Add SKIPs for failed unshare() Message-ID: <202007101551.E001F7B1CE@keescook> References: <20200710185156.2437687-1-keescook@chromium.org> <20200710185156.2437687-2-keescook@chromium.org> <20200710191023.GA2700617@cisco> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200710191023.GA2700617@cisco> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Jul 10, 2020 at 01:10:23PM -0600, Tycho Andersen wrote: > On Fri, Jul 10, 2020 at 11:51:55AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote: > > Running the seccomp tests as a regular user shouldn't just fail tests > > that require CAP_SYS_ADMIN (for getting a PID namespace). Instead, > > detect those cases and SKIP them. > > But if we unshare NEWUSER at the same time as NEWPID, shouldn't we > always be ns_capable(CAP_SYS_ADMIN)? Oh! Yes, you're quite right. :) Instead I guess I should actually check for EINVAL if CONFIG_USER_NS is missing. -- Kees Cook