Re: [PATCH 2/2] RISC-V: Add support for SECCOMP

[David Abdurachmanov]

On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 9:27 PM Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Sun, 28 Oct 2018 04:07:55 PDT (-0700), david.abdurachmanov@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 25, 2018 at 10:36 PM Paul Moore <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Thu, Oct 25, 2018 at 2:31 PM David Abdurachmanov
> >> <david.abdurachmanov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> > On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 10:40 PM Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> > > From: "Wesley W. Terpstra" <wesley@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >>
> >> ...
> >>
> >> > 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.
I also have patch on top of libseccomp-2.3.3.

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