Re: [PATCH v5 12/15] seltests/landlock: rules overlapping test

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Please fix these kind of subjects (selftests). I'd also like the subject description to (quickly) describe what is done (with a verb), to start with a capital (like a title), and to contain "network", something like this:
selftests/landlock: Add test for overlapping network rules

This is a good test though.


On 16/05/2022 17:20, Konstantin Meskhidze wrote:
This patch adds overlapping rules for one port.
First rule adds just bind() access right for a port.
The second one adds both bind() and connect()
access rights for the same port.

Signed-off-by: Konstantin Meskhidze <konstantin.meskhidze@xxxxxxxxxx>
---

Changes since v3:
* Add ruleset_overlap test.

Changes since v4:
* Refactoring code with self->port, self->addr4 variables.

---
  tools/testing/selftests/landlock/net_test.c | 51 +++++++++++++++++++++
  1 file changed, 51 insertions(+)

diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/landlock/net_test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/landlock/net_test.c
index bf8e49466d1d..1d8c9dfdbd48 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/landlock/net_test.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/landlock/net_test.c
@@ -677,4 +677,55 @@ TEST_F_FORK(socket_test, connect_afunspec_with_restictions) {
  	ASSERT_EQ(1, WIFEXITED(status));
  	ASSERT_EQ(EXIT_SUCCESS, WEXITSTATUS(status));
  }
+
+TEST_F_FORK(socket_test, ruleset_overlap) {

Please run clang-format-14 on all files (and all commits).

+
+	int sockfd;
+
+	struct landlock_ruleset_attr ruleset_attr = {
+		.handled_access_net = LANDLOCK_ACCESS_NET_BIND_TCP |
+				      LANDLOCK_ACCESS_NET_CONNECT_TCP,
+	};
+	struct landlock_net_service_attr net_service_1 = {
+		.allowed_access = LANDLOCK_ACCESS_NET_BIND_TCP,
+
+		.port = self->port[0],
+	};
+
+		struct landlock_net_service_attr net_service_2 = {
+		.allowed_access = LANDLOCK_ACCESS_NET_BIND_TCP |
+				  LANDLOCK_ACCESS_NET_CONNECT_TCP,
+
+		.port = self->port[0],
+	};
+
+	const int ruleset_fd = landlock_create_ruleset(&ruleset_attr,
+					sizeof(ruleset_attr), 0);
+	ASSERT_LE(0, ruleset_fd);
+
+	/* Allows bind operations to the port[0] socket */

Please ends this kind of comments with a final dot (all files/commits).

+	ASSERT_EQ(0, landlock_add_rule(ruleset_fd, LANDLOCK_RULE_NET_SERVICE,
+				       &net_service_1, 0));
+	/* Allows connect and bind operations to the port[0] socket */
+	ASSERT_EQ(0, landlock_add_rule(ruleset_fd, LANDLOCK_RULE_NET_SERVICE,
+				       &net_service_2, 0));
+
+	/* Enforces the ruleset. */
+	enforce_ruleset(_metadata, ruleset_fd);
+
+	/* Creates a server socket */
+	sockfd = create_socket(_metadata, false, false);
+	ASSERT_LE(0, sockfd);
+
+	/* Binds the socket to address with port[0] */
+	ASSERT_EQ(0, bind(sockfd, (struct sockaddr *)&self->addr4[0], sizeof(self->addr4[0])));
+
+	/* Makes connection to socket with port[0] */
+	ASSERT_EQ(0, connect(sockfd, (struct sockaddr *)&self->addr4[0],

Can you please get rid of this (struct sockaddr *) type casting please (without compiler warning)?

+						   sizeof(self->addr4[0])));

Here, you can enforce a new ruleset with net_service_1 and check that bind() is still allowed but not connect().

+
+	/* Closes socket */
+	ASSERT_EQ(0, close(sockfd));
+}
+
  TEST_HARNESS_MAIN
--
2.25.1




[Index of Archives]     [Netfitler Users]     [Berkeley Packet Filter]     [LARTC]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite Forum]

  Powered by Linux