From: Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com>
To: Lakshmi Ramasubramanian <nramas@linux.microsoft.com>,
dhowells@redhat.com, matthewgarrett@google.com,
sashal@kernel.org, jamorris@linux.microsoft.com,
linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org,
linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, keyrings@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 0/10] KEYS: Measure keys when they are created or updated
Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2019 17:08:46 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1573578526.17949.47.camel@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <b135b1ac-add6-aea4-cab3-3e9c12796b6a@linux.microsoft.com>
On Mon, 2019-11-11 at 11:41 -0800, Lakshmi Ramasubramanian wrote:
> On 11/11/2019 11:32 AM, Lakshmi Ramasubramanian wrote:
>
> Hi Mimi,
>
> > Problem Statement:
The above line isn't needed.
> >
> > Keys created or updated in the system are currently not being measured.
> >
> > This change aims to address measuring keys created or updated
> > in the system:
> >
> > => Patches #1 through #5 update IMA policy functions to handle
> > measurement of keys based on configured IMA policy.
> >
> > => Patches #6 and #7 add IMA hook for measuring keys and the call
> > to the IMA hook from key_create_or_update function.
> > Keys are processed immediately - no support for
> > deferred processing.
> >
> > => Patches #8 through #10 add support for queuing keys if
> > custom IMA policies have not been applied yet and process
> > the queued keys when custom IMA policies are applied.
>
> I was wondering if it'd be better to split this patch set into two sets:
>
> 1st set including the patches for measuring keys without queuing support
> (Patches #1 through #7)
I've commented on patches 1 - 4. There's still so much wrong with
this patch set. Limiting the scope of the patch set sounds like
really a good idea.
Mimi
>
> 2nd set including the patches that add queuing support (Patches #8
> through #10).
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com>
To: Lakshmi Ramasubramanian <nramas@linux.microsoft.com>,
dhowells@redhat.com, matthewgarrett@google.com,
sashal@kernel.org, jamorris@linux.microsoft.com,
linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org,
linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, keyrings@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 0/10] KEYS: Measure keys when they are created or updated
Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2019 12:08:46 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1573578526.17949.47.camel@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <b135b1ac-add6-aea4-cab3-3e9c12796b6a@linux.microsoft.com>
On Mon, 2019-11-11 at 11:41 -0800, Lakshmi Ramasubramanian wrote:
> On 11/11/2019 11:32 AM, Lakshmi Ramasubramanian wrote:
>
> Hi Mimi,
>
> > Problem Statement:
The above line isn't needed.
> >
> > Keys created or updated in the system are currently not being measured.
> >
> > This change aims to address measuring keys created or updated
> > in the system:
> >
> > => Patches #1 through #5 update IMA policy functions to handle
> > measurement of keys based on configured IMA policy.
> >
> > => Patches #6 and #7 add IMA hook for measuring keys and the call
> > to the IMA hook from key_create_or_update function.
> > Keys are processed immediately - no support for
> > deferred processing.
> >
> > => Patches #8 through #10 add support for queuing keys if
> > custom IMA policies have not been applied yet and process
> > the queued keys when custom IMA policies are applied.
>
> I was wondering if it'd be better to split this patch set into two sets:
>
> 1st set including the patches for measuring keys without queuing support
> (Patches #1 through #7)
I've commented on patches 1 - 4. There's still so much wrong with
this patch set. Limiting the scope of the patch set sounds like
really a good idea.
Mimi
>
> 2nd set including the patches that add queuing support (Patches #8
> through #10).
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-11-12 17:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 44+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-11-11 19:32 [PATCH v5 0/10] KEYS: Measure keys when they are created or updated Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2019-11-11 19:32 ` Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2019-11-11 19:32 ` [PATCH v5 01/10] IMA: Added KEYRING_CHECK func in IMA policy to measure keys Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2019-11-11 19:32 ` Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2019-11-12 17:04 ` Mimi Zohar
2019-11-12 17:04 ` Mimi Zohar
2019-11-12 17:37 ` Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2019-11-12 17:37 ` Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2019-11-11 19:32 ` [PATCH v5 02/10] IMA: Added keyrings= option in IMA policy to only measure keys added to the specifi Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2019-11-11 19:32 ` [PATCH v5 02/10] IMA: Added keyrings= option in IMA policy to only measure keys added to the specified keyrings Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2019-11-12 17:05 ` [PATCH v5 02/10] IMA: Added keyrings= option in IMA policy to only measure keys added to the spe Mimi Zohar
2019-11-12 17:05 ` [PATCH v5 02/10] IMA: Added keyrings= option in IMA policy to only measure keys added to the specified keyrings Mimi Zohar
2019-11-12 17:43 ` [PATCH v5 02/10] IMA: Added keyrings= option in IMA policy to only measure keys added to the spe Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2019-11-12 17:43 ` [PATCH v5 02/10] IMA: Added keyrings= option in IMA policy to only measure keys added to the specified keyrings Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2019-11-12 17:58 ` [PATCH v5 02/10] IMA: Added keyrings= option in IMA policy to only measure keys added to the spe Mimi Zohar
2019-11-12 17:58 ` [PATCH v5 02/10] IMA: Added keyrings= option in IMA policy to only measure keys added to the specified keyrings Mimi Zohar
2019-11-11 19:32 ` [PATCH v5 03/10] IMA: Read keyrings= option from the IMA policy into ima_rule_entry Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2019-11-11 19:32 ` Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2019-11-11 19:32 ` [PATCH v5 04/10] IMA: Updated IMA policy functions to return keyrings option read from the policy Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2019-11-11 19:32 ` Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2019-11-12 17:05 ` [PATCH v5 04/10] IMA: Updated IMA policy functions to return keyrings option read from the polic Mimi Zohar
2019-11-12 17:05 ` [PATCH v5 04/10] IMA: Updated IMA policy functions to return keyrings option read from the policy Mimi Zohar
2019-11-12 17:47 ` [PATCH v5 04/10] IMA: Updated IMA policy functions to return keyrings option read from the polic Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2019-11-12 17:47 ` [PATCH v5 04/10] IMA: Updated IMA policy functions to return keyrings option read from the policy Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2019-11-12 18:06 ` [PATCH v5 04/10] IMA: Updated IMA policy functions to return keyrings option read from the polic Mimi Zohar
2019-11-12 18:06 ` [PATCH v5 04/10] IMA: Updated IMA policy functions to return keyrings option read from the policy Mimi Zohar
2019-11-11 19:32 ` [PATCH v5 05/10] IMA: Measure key if the IMA policy allows measurement for the keyring to which the Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2019-11-11 19:32 ` [PATCH v5 05/10] IMA: Measure key if the IMA policy allows measurement for the keyring to which the key is linked to Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2019-11-11 19:32 ` [PATCH v5 06/10] IMA: Defined an IMA hook to measure keys on key create or update Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2019-11-11 19:32 ` Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2019-11-11 19:33 ` [PATCH v5 07/10] KEYS: Call the IMA hook to measure key when a new key is created or an existing key Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2019-11-11 19:33 ` [PATCH v5 07/10] KEYS: Call the IMA hook to measure key when a new key is created or an existing key is updated Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2019-11-11 19:33 ` [PATCH v5 08/10] IMA: Added a flag to determine whether IMA hook can process the key now or has to q Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2019-11-11 19:33 ` [PATCH v5 08/10] IMA: Added a flag to determine whether IMA hook can process the key now or has to queue for processing later Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2019-11-11 19:33 ` [PATCH v5 09/10] IMA: Defined functions to queue and dequeue keys for measurement Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2019-11-11 19:33 ` Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2019-11-11 19:33 ` [PATCH v5 10/10] IMA: Call queue and dequeue functions to measure keys Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2019-11-11 19:33 ` Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2019-11-11 19:41 ` [PATCH v5 0/10] KEYS: Measure keys when they are created or updated Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2019-11-11 19:41 ` Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2019-11-12 17:08 ` Mimi Zohar [this message]
2019-11-12 17:08 ` Mimi Zohar
2019-11-12 17:52 ` Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2019-11-12 17:52 ` Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1573578526.17949.47.camel@linux.ibm.com \
--to=zohar@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=jamorris@linux.microsoft.com \
--cc=keyrings@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=matthewgarrett@google.com \
--cc=nramas@linux.microsoft.com \
--cc=sashal@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.