From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3FB75C282D7 for ; Wed, 30 Jan 2019 13:54:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D2482082F for ; Wed, 30 Jan 2019 13:54:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727149AbfA3NyP (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Jan 2019 08:54:15 -0500 Received: from mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.158.5]:48514 "EHLO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726151AbfA3NyP (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Jan 2019 08:54:15 -0500 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098420.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id x0UDkWHh079639 for ; Wed, 30 Jan 2019 08:54:14 -0500 Received: from e06smtp05.uk.ibm.com (e06smtp05.uk.ibm.com [195.75.94.101]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2qbaetr0bw-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Wed, 30 Jan 2019 08:54:14 -0500 Received: from localhost by e06smtp05.uk.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Wed, 30 Jan 2019 13:54:11 -0000 Received: from b06cxnps3074.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (9.149.109.194) by e06smtp05.uk.ibm.com (192.168.101.135) with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted; (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256/256) Wed, 30 Jan 2019 13:54:08 -0000 Received: from b06wcsmtp001.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (b06wcsmtp001.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.105.160]) by b06cxnps3074.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id x0UDs78m41484344 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Wed, 30 Jan 2019 13:54:07 GMT Received: from b06wcsmtp001.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9BEBFA405F; Wed, 30 Jan 2019 13:54:07 +0000 (GMT) Received: from b06wcsmtp001.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28FBCA405C; Wed, 30 Jan 2019 13:54:07 +0000 (GMT) Received: from localhost.localdomain (unknown [9.80.91.219]) by b06wcsmtp001.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Wed, 30 Jan 2019 13:54:07 +0000 (GMT) Subject: Re: Understanding fsuuid policy rule for appraisal and exclusion From: Mimi Zohar To: rishi gupta Cc: linux-integrity Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2019 08:53:56 -0500 In-Reply-To: References: <1548787074.20210.27.camel@linux.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.20.5 (3.20.5-1.fc24) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 x-cbid: 19013013-0020-0000-0000-0000030E54F0 X-IBM-AV-DETECTION: SAVI=unused REMOTE=unused XFE=unused x-cbparentid: 19013013-0021-0000-0000-0000215F5888 Message-Id: <1548856436.20210.107.camel@linux.ibm.com> X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:,, definitions=2019-01-30_10:,, signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=955 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1810050000 definitions=main-1901300110 Sender: linux-integrity-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org (Bottom post please.) On Wed, 2019-01-30 at 19:08 +0530, rishi gupta wrote: > Yes, I am having problem as I am not able to validate IMA > implementation on my device. > Basically, uuid of partition B is not yyyy-yy-yy-yy and therefore I am > not able to conclude whether it will be appraised or not. > > If no rule is written for any partition is it appraised ? That's dependent on the rest of the policy rules.  Without an appraise rule, nothing is appraised. Mimi