Messages in this thread | | | From | Kees Cook <> | Date | Fri, 2 Nov 2018 08:51:55 -0700 | Subject | Re: [PATCH 2/2] RISC-V: Add support for SECCOMP |
| |
On Fri, Nov 2, 2018 at 6:32 AM, David Abdurachmanov <david.abdurachmanov@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 9:27 PM Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@sifive.com> wrote: >> >> On Sun, 28 Oct 2018 04:07:55 PDT (-0700), david.abdurachmanov@gmail.com wrote: >> > On Thu, Oct 25, 2018 at 10:36 PM Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> On Thu, Oct 25, 2018 at 2:31 PM David Abdurachmanov >> >> <david.abdurachmanov@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 10:40 PM Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@sifive.com> wrote: >> >> > > From: "Wesley W. Terpstra" <wesley@sifive.com> >> >> >> >> ... >> >> >> >> > Palmer, >> >> > >> >> > Half of the patch seems to touch audit parts. I started working on audit >> >> > support this morning, and I can boot Fedora with audit traces. >> >> > >> >> > [root@fedora-riscv ~]# dmesg | grep audit >> >> > [ 0.312000] audit: initializing netlink subsys (disabled) >> >> > [ 0.316000] audit: type=2000 audit(0.316:1): state=initialized >> >> > audit_enabled=0 res=1 >> >> > [ 7.288000] audit: type=1130 audit(1529665913.772:2): pid=1 uid=0 >> >> > auid=4294967295 ses=4294967295 msg='unit=systemd-remount-fs >> >> > comm="systemd" exe="/usr/lib/systemd/systemd" hostname=? addr=? >> >> > terminal=? res=success' >> >> > [ 7.684000] audit: type=1130 audit(1529665914.176:3): pid=1 uid=0 >> >> > auid=4294967295 ses=4294967295 msg='unit=systemd-sysctl comm="systemd" >> >> > exe="/usr/lib/systemd/systemd" hostname=? addr=? terminal=? >> >> > res=success' >> >> > [..] >> >> > >> >> > I am still working on audit user-space support for better testing. >> >> > >> >> > I suggest we first implement audit and then seccomp. >> >> >> >> FYI, while small and far from comprehensive, we do have a test suite >> >> we use for basic validation of the audit kernel bits which may be >> >> helpful while you're working on the audit enablement: >> >> >> >> * https://github.com/linux-audit/audit-testsuite >> > >> > Currently I checked the following to work: >> > - /proc/self/loginuid (required by DNF [package manager]) >> > - auditctl (checked several different example rules from internet) >> > - aulast >> > - aulastlog >> > - ausearch >> > - ausyscall >> > - aureport >> > - autrace (compared some syscalls to strace: order and >> > return value/input arguments seems to be correct) >> > >> > I checked audit-testsuite yesterday and it seems to be only for >> > x86-64 / x86-32. After adjusting it (MODE, syscalls) I am at: >> > >> > Failed 4/14 test programs. 19/88 subtests failed. >> > >> > I don't plan to look further in the failure, e.g.: >> > - syscall_socketcall: that's an old stuff and not relevant to >> > new arches >> > - syscall_module: Fedora kernel currently is not compiled >> > with kernel loadable module support >> > - filter_exclude: two tests fail because id -Z doesn't print >> > any categories, but "semanage login -l" output is identical >> > between x86_64 and riscv64 >> > - netfilter_pkt: don't have CONFIG_IP_NF_MANGLE enabled >> > >> > Fedora kernel currently has minimal CONFIG_* options >> > and is built without loadable module support. >> > >> > I will send the patches for review soon. >> >> Thanks! > > I fixed the last issue I see with SECCOMP this morning.
Can you CC me on the series? I'd love to take a look.
> I also have patch on top of libseccomp-2.3.3.
Nice! If you toss it up on github I can review that too. :)
-Kees
> > Testsuite results for SIM: > > Regression Test Summary > tests run: 4434 > tests skipped: 88 > tests passed: 4434 > tests failed: 0 > tests errored: 0 > > Testsuite results for LIVE: > > Regression Test Summary > tests run: 6 > tests skipped: 0 > tests passed: 6 > tests failed: 0 > tests errored: 0 > > Then tested a couple examples manually w/ and w/o BPF and it > performed the same as on x86_64 (also checked exit codes & > strace output). > > Upstream libseccomp has now more tests. Once I rebase & re-test > with master of libseccomp, I will send both. > > david
-- Kees Cook
| |