From: "Günther Noack" <gnoack@google.com>
To: Mikhail Ivanov <ivanov.mikhail1@huawei-partners.com>
Cc: mic@digikod.net, willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com,
gnoack3000@gmail.com, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org,
yusongping@huawei.com, artem.kuzin@huawei.com,
konstantin.meskhidze@huawei.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 13/19] selftests/landlock: Test packet protocol alias
Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2024 15:33:28 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZurWqFq_dGWOsgUU@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240904104824.1844082-14-ivanov.mikhail1@huawei-partners.com>
On Wed, Sep 04, 2024 at 06:48:18PM +0800, Mikhail Ivanov wrote:
> (AF_INET, SOCK_PACKET) is an alias for (AF_PACKET, SOCK_PACKET)
> (Cf. __sock_create). Landlock shouldn't restrict one pair if the other
> was allowed. Add `packet_protocol` fixture and test to
> validate these scenarios.
>
> Signed-off-by: Mikhail Ivanov <ivanov.mikhail1@huawei-partners.com>
> ---
> .../testing/selftests/landlock/socket_test.c | 75 ++++++++++++++++++-
> 1 file changed, 74 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/landlock/socket_test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/landlock/socket_test.c
> index 23698b8c2f4d..8fc507bf902a 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/landlock/socket_test.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/landlock/socket_test.c
> @@ -7,7 +7,7 @@
>
> #define _GNU_SOURCE
>
> -#include "landlock.h"
> +#include <linux/landlock.h>
> #include <linux/pfkeyv2.h>
> #include <linux/kcm.h>
> #include <linux/can.h>
> @@ -665,4 +665,77 @@ TEST(kernel_socket)
> EXPECT_EQ(0, test_socket(AF_SMC, SOCK_STREAM, 0));
> }
>
> +FIXTURE(packet_protocol)
> +{
> + struct protocol_variant prot_allowed, prot_tested;
> +};
> +
> +FIXTURE_VARIANT(packet_protocol)
> +{
> + bool packet;
> +};
> +
> +FIXTURE_SETUP(packet_protocol)
> +{
> + self->prot_allowed.type = self->prot_tested.type = SOCK_PACKET;
> +
> + self->prot_allowed.family = variant->packet ? AF_PACKET : AF_INET;
> + self->prot_tested.family = variant->packet ? AF_INET : AF_PACKET;
Nit: You might as well write these resulting prot_allowed and prot_tested struct
values out in the two fixture variants. It's one layer of indirection less and
clarity trumps deduplication in tests, IMHO. Fine either way though.
> +
> + /* Packet protocol requires NET_RAW to be set (Cf. packet_create). */
> + set_cap(_metadata, CAP_NET_RAW);
> +};
> +
> +FIXTURE_TEARDOWN(packet_protocol)
> +{
> + clear_cap(_metadata, CAP_NET_RAW);
> +}
> +
> +/* clang-format off */
> +FIXTURE_VARIANT_ADD(packet_protocol, packet_allows_inet) {
> + /* clang-format on */
> + .packet = true,
> +};
> +
> +/* clang-format off */
> +FIXTURE_VARIANT_ADD(packet_protocol, inet_allows_packet) {
> + /* clang-format on */
> + .packet = false,
> +};
> +
> +TEST_F(packet_protocol, alias_restriction)
> +{
> + const struct landlock_ruleset_attr ruleset_attr = {
> + .handled_access_socket = LANDLOCK_ACCESS_SOCKET_CREATE,
> + };
> + struct landlock_socket_attr packet_socket_create = {
> + .allowed_access = LANDLOCK_ACCESS_SOCKET_CREATE,
> + .family = self->prot_allowed.family,
> + .type = self->prot_allowed.type,
> + };
> + int ruleset_fd;
> +
> + /*
> + * Checks that packet socket is created sucessfuly without
Typo nit: "successfully"
Please also check in other locations, I might well have missed some ;-)
> + * landlock restrictions.
> + */
> + ASSERT_EQ(0, test_socket_variant(&self->prot_tested));
> +
> + ruleset_fd =
> + landlock_create_ruleset(&ruleset_attr, sizeof(ruleset_attr), 0);
> + ASSERT_LE(0, ruleset_fd);
> +
> + ASSERT_EQ(0, landlock_add_rule(ruleset_fd, LANDLOCK_RULE_SOCKET,
> + &packet_socket_create, 0));
> + enforce_ruleset(_metadata, ruleset_fd);
> + ASSERT_EQ(0, close(ruleset_fd));
> +
> + /*
> + * (AF_INET, SOCK_PACKET) is an alias for the (AF_PACKET, SOCK_PACKET)
> + * (Cf. __sock_create). Checks that Landlock does not restrict one pair
> + * if the other was allowed.
> + */
> + EXPECT_EQ(0, test_socket_variant(&self->prot_tested));
Why not check both AF_INET and AF_PACKET in both fixtures?
Since they are synonymous, they should both work, no matter which
of the two variants was used in the rule.
It would be slightly more comprehensive and make the fixture smaller.
WDYT?
> +}
> +
> TEST_HARNESS_MAIN
> --
> 2.34.1
>
—Günther
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-09-18 13:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 76+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-09-04 10:48 [RFC PATCH v3 00/19] Support socket access-control Mikhail Ivanov
2024-09-04 10:48 ` [RFC PATCH v3 01/19] landlock: " Mikhail Ivanov
2024-09-06 13:09 ` Günther Noack
2024-09-09 7:23 ` Mikhail Ivanov
2024-11-11 16:29 ` Mikhail Ivanov
2024-11-22 17:45 ` Günther Noack
2024-11-25 11:04 ` Mikhail Ivanov
2024-11-27 18:43 ` Mickaël Salaün
2024-11-28 12:01 ` Mikhail Ivanov
2024-11-28 20:52 ` Mickaël Salaün
2024-12-02 11:32 ` Mikhail Ivanov
2024-12-24 16:55 ` Mikhail Ivanov
2025-01-10 11:12 ` Günther Noack
2025-01-10 13:02 ` Mikhail Ivanov
2025-01-10 16:27 ` Günther Noack
2025-01-10 16:55 ` Mikhail Ivanov
2025-01-14 18:31 ` Mickaël Salaün
2025-01-24 12:28 ` Mikhail Ivanov
2025-01-24 14:02 ` Mickaël Salaün
2024-09-04 10:48 ` [RFC PATCH v3 02/19] landlock: Add hook on socket creation Mikhail Ivanov
2024-09-04 10:48 ` [RFC PATCH v3 03/19] selftests/landlock: Test basic socket restriction Mikhail Ivanov
2024-09-10 9:53 ` Günther Noack
2024-09-04 10:48 ` [RFC PATCH v3 04/19] selftests/landlock: Test adding a rule with each supported access Mikhail Ivanov
2024-09-10 9:53 ` Günther Noack
2024-09-04 10:48 ` [RFC PATCH v3 05/19] selftests/landlock: Test adding a rule for each unknown access Mikhail Ivanov
2024-09-10 9:53 ` Günther Noack
2024-09-04 10:48 ` [RFC PATCH v3 06/19] selftests/landlock: Test adding a rule for unhandled access Mikhail Ivanov
2024-09-10 9:22 ` Günther Noack
2024-09-11 8:19 ` Mikhail Ivanov
2024-09-13 15:04 ` Günther Noack
2024-09-13 16:15 ` Mikhail Ivanov
2024-09-04 10:48 ` [RFC PATCH v3 07/19] selftests/landlock: Test adding a rule for empty access Mikhail Ivanov
2024-09-18 12:42 ` Günther Noack
2024-09-18 13:03 ` Mikhail Ivanov
2024-09-04 10:48 ` [RFC PATCH v3 08/19] selftests/landlock: Test overlapped restriction Mikhail Ivanov
2024-09-18 12:42 ` Günther Noack
2024-09-04 10:48 ` [RFC PATCH v3 09/19] selftests/landlock: Test creating a ruleset with unknown access Mikhail Ivanov
2024-09-18 12:44 ` Günther Noack
2024-09-04 10:48 ` [RFC PATCH v3 10/19] selftests/landlock: Test adding a rule with family and type outside the range Mikhail Ivanov
2024-09-04 10:48 ` [RFC PATCH v3 11/19] selftests/landlock: Test unsupported protocol restriction Mikhail Ivanov
2024-09-18 12:54 ` Günther Noack
2024-09-18 13:36 ` Mikhail Ivanov
2024-09-04 10:48 ` [RFC PATCH v3 12/19] selftests/landlock: Test that kernel space sockets are not restricted Mikhail Ivanov
2024-09-04 12:45 ` Mikhail Ivanov
2024-09-18 13:00 ` Günther Noack
2024-09-19 10:53 ` Mikhail Ivanov
2024-09-04 10:48 ` [RFC PATCH v3 13/19] selftests/landlock: Test packet protocol alias Mikhail Ivanov
2024-09-18 13:33 ` Günther Noack [this message]
2024-09-18 14:01 ` Mikhail Ivanov
2024-09-04 10:48 ` [RFC PATCH v3 14/19] selftests/landlock: Test socketpair(2) restriction Mikhail Ivanov
2024-09-18 13:47 ` Günther Noack
2024-09-23 12:57 ` Mikhail Ivanov
2024-09-25 12:17 ` Mikhail Ivanov
2024-09-27 9:48 ` Günther Noack
2024-09-28 20:06 ` Günther Noack
2024-09-29 17:31 ` Mickaël Salaün
2024-10-03 17:27 ` Mikhail Ivanov
2024-09-04 10:48 ` [RFC PATCH v3 15/19] selftests/landlock: Test SCTP peeloff restriction Mikhail Ivanov
2024-09-27 14:35 ` Günther Noack
2024-10-03 12:15 ` Mikhail Ivanov
2024-09-04 10:48 ` [RFC PATCH v3 16/19] selftests/landlock: Test that accept(2) is not restricted Mikhail Ivanov
2024-09-27 14:53 ` Günther Noack
2024-10-03 12:41 ` Mikhail Ivanov
2024-09-04 10:48 ` [RFC PATCH v3 17/19] samples/landlock: Replace atoi() with strtoull() in populate_ruleset_net() Mikhail Ivanov
2024-09-27 15:12 ` Günther Noack
2024-10-03 12:59 ` Mikhail Ivanov
2024-09-04 10:48 ` [RFC PATCH v3 18/19] samples/landlock: Support socket protocol restrictions Mikhail Ivanov
2024-10-01 7:56 ` Günther Noack
2024-10-03 13:15 ` Mikhail Ivanov
2024-09-04 10:48 ` [RFC PATCH v3 19/19] landlock: Document socket rule type support Mikhail Ivanov
2024-10-01 7:09 ` Günther Noack
2024-10-03 14:00 ` Mikhail Ivanov
2024-10-03 16:21 ` Günther Noack
2025-04-22 17:19 ` [RFC PATCH v3 00/19] Support socket access-control Mickaël Salaün
2025-04-25 13:58 ` Günther Noack
2025-04-29 11:59 ` Mikhail Ivanov
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=ZurWqFq_dGWOsgUU@google.com \
--to=gnoack@google.com \
--cc=artem.kuzin@huawei.com \
--cc=gnoack3000@gmail.com \
--cc=ivanov.mikhail1@huawei-partners.com \
--cc=konstantin.meskhidze@huawei.com \
--cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mic@digikod.net \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com \
--cc=yusongping@huawei.com \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).