[PATCH v5 4/6] selftest/openat2: Add tests for O_MAYEXEC enforcing

[Mickaël Salaün]

On 12/05/2020 23:57, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Tue, May 05, 2020 at 05:31:54PM +0200, Mickaël Salaün wrote:
>> Test propagation of noexec mount points or file executability through
>> files open with or without O_MAYEXEC, thanks to the
>> fs.open_mayexec_enforce sysctl.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Mickaël Salaün <mic at digikod.net>
>> Reviewed-by: Thibaut Sautereau <thibaut.sautereau at ssi.gouv.fr>
>> Cc: Aleksa Sarai <cyphar at cyphar.com>
>> Cc: Al Viro <viro at zeniv.linux.org.uk>
>> Cc: Kees Cook <keescook at chromium.org>
>> Cc: Shuah Khan <shuah at kernel.org>
> 
> Yay tests! :) Notes below...
> 
>> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/openat2/Makefile b/tools/testing/selftests/openat2/Makefile
>> index 4b93b1417b86..cb98bdb4d5b1 100644
>> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/openat2/Makefile
>> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/openat2/Makefile
>> @@ -1,7 +1,8 @@
>>  # SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-or-later
>>  
>>  CFLAGS += -Wall -O2 -g -fsanitize=address -fsanitize=undefined
>> -TEST_GEN_PROGS := openat2_test resolve_test rename_attack_test
>> +LDLIBS += -lcap
>> +TEST_GEN_PROGS := openat2_test resolve_test rename_attack_test omayexec_test
> 
> I realize the others have _test in their name, but that feels intensely
> redundant to me. :)

It is redundant in the path name but it is useful to match the generated
files e.g., in gitignore.

> 
>> [...]
>> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/openat2/omayexec_test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/openat2/omayexec_test.c
>> new file mode 100644
>> index 000000000000..7052c852daf8
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/openat2/omayexec_test.c
>> [...]
>> +FIXTURE_DATA(mount_exec_file_exec) { };
> 
> For each of these, Please use "FIXTURE" not "FIXTURE_DATA". See:
> 1ae81d78a8b2 ("selftests/seccomp: Adjust test fixture counts")

Indeed.

> 
>> +FIXTURE_SETUP(mount_exec_file_exec)
>> +{
>> +	create_workspace(_metadata, 1, 1);
> 
> Maybe save the system's original sysctl in create_workspace() instead
> of always restoring it to 0 in delete_workspace()?

Right.

> 
> Otherwise, looks good!
> 

Thanks.