On Tue, 2009-04-28 at 08:37 -0500, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> Quoting Subrata Modak ([email protected]):
> > On Wed, 2009-04-22 at 18:11 -0500, Serge E. Hallyn wrote: 
> > > Add capability bounding set testcases, to verify the following:
> > > 
> > >         1. prctl(CAP_BSET_READ, 0..NCAPS) returns 1
> > >         2. prctl(CAP_BSET_READ, -1|NCAPS+1) return -1
> > > 
> > >         3. prctl(CAP_BSET_DROP, -1|NCAPS+1) returns -1
> > >         4. prctl(CAP_BSET_DROP, 0..NCAPS) returns 1
> > >            4b. prctl(CAP_BSET_READ, N) returns 0 after each unset, 1 for 
> > > those not yet removed
> > > 
> > >         5. fI=empty; N \notin pP; prctl(CAPBSET_DROP, N); setting pI=N 
> > > fails
> > > 
> > >         6. pI=N; fI=fE=N; prctl(CAPBSET_DROP, N); exec(f) - N \in pE
> > >                 (or make f setuid-root)
> > >         7. pI=0; fI=fE=N; prctl(CAPBSET_DROP, N); exec(f) - N \notin pE
> > >                 (or make f setuid-root)
> > > 
> > > A set of securebits and keepcaps tests have yet to be written (as
> > > per an email I sent a few months ago).
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Serge Hallyn <[email protected]>
> > 
> > Thanks Serge. Here are the results run on the following machine:
> > 
> > # uname -a
> > Linux 2.6.29-5-default #1 SMP Tue Apr 21 20:04:44 IST 2009 x86_64 x86_64
> > x86_64 GNU/Linux
> > 
> > <<<test_output>>>
> > testing bounding set reading
> > cap_bounds_r    1  FAIL  :  prctl(CAP_BSET_READ, 0) returned 0
> > testing bounding set dropping
> > cap_bounds_rw    1  FAIL  :  Bit 1 wasn't yet dropped, but isn't in
> > bounding set
> > cap_bounds_rw    2  FAIL  :  after dropping bits 0..0, 1 was not in
> > bounding set
> 
> Good.

Thanks

> > checking bounding set constraint in pI
> > cap_bounds_r    1  BROK  :  Not starting with CAP_SYS_ADMIN
> > check_pe    1  PASS  :  cap is in pE
> > check_pe    1  PASS  :  cap is not in pE
> > <<<execution_status>>>
> > 
> > Are these failures expected for 2.6.29 ? Also please find attached the
> > kernel config file on which i tested this.
> 
> yeah, fix your kernel :)
> 

Great. Since 29 is already out, i am hoping that it should be fixed by
the time 30 is out. If time permits, i will give a try in any of the
intermediate RC-s to see if the problem still persists.

Regards--
Subrata

> That's why I started with this set of tests...  Unfortunately.
> 
> thanks,
> -serge


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Register Now & Save for Velocity, the Web Performance & Operations 
Conference from O'Reilly Media. Velocity features a full day of 
expert-led, hands-on workshops and two days of sessions from industry 
leaders in dedicated Performance & Operations tracks. Use code vel09scf 
and Save an extra 15% before 5/3. http://p.sf.net/sfu/velocityconf
_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list

Reply via email to