Re: [PATCH v3 04/15] selinux: Refactor to remove bprm_secureexec hook

[Kees Cook]

On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 5:19 PM, Paul Moore <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 8:03 PM, Paul Moore <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 6:25 PM, Kees Cook <keescook@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> The SELinux bprm_secureexec hook can be merged with the bprm_set_creds
>>> hook since it's dealing with the same information, and all of the details
>>> are finalized during the first call to the bprm_set_creds hook via
>>> prepare_binprm() (subsequent calls due to binfmt_script, etc, are ignored
>>> via bprm->called_set_creds).
>>>
>>> Here, the test can just happen at the end of the bprm_set_creds hook,
>>> and the bprm_secureexec hook can be dropped.
>>>
>>> Cc: Paul Moore <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> Cc: Stephen Smalley <sds@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>>  security/selinux/hooks.c | 24 +++++-------------------
>>>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
>>
>> This seems reasonable in the context of the other changes.
>>
>> Stephen just posted an AT_SECURE test for the selinux-testsuite on the
>> SELinux mailing list, it would be nice to ensure that this patchset
>> doesn't run afoul of that.
>
> Quick follow-up: I just merged Stephen's test into the test suite:
>
> * https://github.com/SELinuxProject/selinux-testsuite

Is there a quick how-to on just running the AT_SECURE test?

-Kees

-- 
Kees Cook
Pixel Security