From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mimi Zohar Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2019 22:42:29 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 1/6] IMA: Check IMA policy flag Message-Id: <1576017749.4579.40.camel@linux.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ibm852" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 List-Id: References: <20191204224131.3384-1-nramas@linux.microsoft.com> <20191204224131.3384-2-nramas@linux.microsoft.com> In-Reply-To: <20191204224131.3384-2-nramas@linux.microsoft.com> To: Lakshmi Ramasubramanian , linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org Cc: eric.snowberg@oracle.com, dhowells@redhat.com, mathew.j.martineau@linux.intel.com, matthewgarrett@google.com, sashal@kernel.org, jamorris@linux.microsoft.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, keyrings@vger.kernel.org T24gV2VkLCAyMDE5LTEyLTA0IGF0IDE0OjQxIC0wODAwLCBMYWtzaG1pIFJhbWFzdWJyYW1hbmlh biB3cm90ZToKPiBSZXR1cm4gaW1tZWRpYXRlbHkgZnJvbSBwcm9jZXNzX2J1ZmZlcl9tZWFzdXJl bWVudCgpCj4gaWYgdGhlIElNQSBwb2xpY3kgZmxhZyBpcyBzZXQgdG8gemVyby4gTm90IGRvaW5n IHRoaXMKPiBjYW4gcmVzdWx0IGluIGtlcm5lbCBwYW5pYyB3aGVuIHByb2Nlc3NfYnVmZmVyX21l YXN1cmVtZW50KCkKPiBpcyBjYWxsZWQgYmVmb3JlIElNQSBpcyBpbml0aWFsaXplZCAoZm9yIGlu c3RhbmNlLCB3aGVuCj4gdGhlIElNQSBob29rIGlzIGNhbGxlZCB3aGVuIGEga2V5IGlzIGFkZGVk IHRvCj4gdGhlIC5idWlsdGluX3RydXN0ZWRfa2V5cyBrZXlyaW5nKS4KPiAKPiBUaGlzIGNoYW5n ZSBhZGRzIHRoZSBjaGVjayBpbiBwcm9jZXNzX2J1ZmZlcl9tZWFzdXJlbWVudCgpCj4gdG8gcmV0 dXJuIGltbWVkaWF0ZWx5IGlmIGltYV9wb2xpY3lfZmxhZyBpcyBzZXQgdG8gemVyby4KClBhdGNo IGRlc2NyaXB0aW9ucyBhcmVuJ3Qgc3VwcG9zZSB0byBiZSB3cml0dGVuIGFzIHBzZXVkbyBjb2Rl LiDCoFN0YXJ0CndpdGggdGhlIGN1cnJlbnQgc3RhdHVzIGFuZCBwcm9ibGVtIGRlc2NyaXB0aW9u LgoKRm9yIGV4YW1wbGUsICJwcm9jZXNzX2J1ZmZlcl9tZWFzdXJlbWVudCgpIG1heSBiZSBjYWxs ZWQgcHJpb3IgdG8gSU1BIGJlaW5nIGluaXRpYWxpemVkLCB3aGljaCB3b3VsZCByZXN1bHQgaW4g YSBrZXJuZWwgcGFuaWMuIMKgVGhpcyBwYXRjaCAuLi4iCgpNaW1pCgo+IAo+IFNpZ25lZC1vZmYt Ynk6IExha3NobWkgUmFtYXN1YnJhbWFuaWFuIDxucmFtYXNAbGludXgubWljcm9zb2Z0LmNvbT4K PiAtLS0KPiAgc2VjdXJpdHkvaW50ZWdyaXR5L2ltYS9pbWFfbWFpbi5jIHwgMyArKysKPiAgMSBm aWxlIGNoYW5nZWQsIDMgaW5zZXJ0aW9ucygrKQo+IAo+IGRpZmYgLS1naXQgYS9zZWN1cml0eS9p bnRlZ3JpdHkvaW1hL2ltYV9tYWluLmMgYi9zZWN1cml0eS9pbnRlZ3JpdHkvaW1hL2ltYV9tYWlu LmMKPiBpbmRleCBkN2U5ODdiYWYxMjcuLjliMzVkYjJmYzc3NyAxMDA2NDQKPiAtLS0gYS9zZWN1 cml0eS9pbnRlZ3JpdHkvaW1hL2ltYV9tYWluLmMKPiArKysgYi9zZWN1cml0eS9pbnRlZ3JpdHkv aW1hL2ltYV9tYWluLmMKPiBAQCAtNjU1LDYgKzY1NSw5IEBAIHZvaWQgcHJvY2Vzc19idWZmZXJf bWVhc3VyZW1lbnQoY29uc3Qgdm9pZCAqYnVmLCBpbnQgc2l6ZSwKPiAgCWludCBhY3Rpb24gPSAw Owo+ICAJdTMyIHNlY2lkOwo+ICAKPiArCWlmICghaW1hX3BvbGljeV9mbGFnKQo+ICsJCXJldHVy bjsKPiArCj4gIAkvKgo+ICAJICogQm90aCBMU00gaG9va3MgYW5kIGF1eGlsYXJ5IGJhc2VkIGJ1 ZmZlciBtZWFzdXJlbWVudHMgYXJlCj4gIAkgKiBiYXNlZCBvbiBwb2xpY3kuICBUbyBhdm9pZCBj b2RlIGR1cGxpY2F0aW9uLCBkaWZmZXJlbnRpYXRlCg== 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=-8.2 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_SANE_2 autolearn=unavailable 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 B4DACC2D0BF for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2019 22:42:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9498420838 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2019 22:42:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1730451AbfLJWml (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Dec 2019 17:42:41 -0500 Received: from mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.158.5]:48758 "EHLO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728361AbfLJWmk (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Dec 2019 17:42:40 -0500 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098421.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id xBAMbWFn026778 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2019 17:42:38 -0500 Received: from e06smtp07.uk.ibm.com (e06smtp07.uk.ibm.com [195.75.94.103]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2wtdp3h62s-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2019 17:42:38 -0500 Received: from localhost by e06smtp07.uk.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Tue, 10 Dec 2019 22:42:36 -0000 Received: from b06avi18878370.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (9.149.26.194) by e06smtp07.uk.ibm.com (192.168.101.137) with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted; (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256/256) Tue, 10 Dec 2019 22:42:32 -0000 Received: from b06wcsmtp001.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (b06wcsmtp001.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.105.160]) by b06avi18878370.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id xBAMgVBZ47382822 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 10 Dec 2019 22:42:31 GMT Received: from b06wcsmtp001.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 76564A4069; Tue, 10 Dec 2019 22:42:31 +0000 (GMT) Received: from b06wcsmtp001.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49ECBA4068; Tue, 10 Dec 2019 22:42:30 +0000 (GMT) Received: from localhost.localdomain (unknown [9.80.214.111]) by b06wcsmtp001.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Tue, 10 Dec 2019 22:42:30 +0000 (GMT) Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 1/6] IMA: Check IMA policy flag From: Mimi Zohar To: Lakshmi Ramasubramanian , linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org Cc: eric.snowberg@oracle.com, dhowells@redhat.com, mathew.j.martineau@linux.intel.com, matthewgarrett@google.com, sashal@kernel.org, jamorris@linux.microsoft.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, keyrings@vger.kernel.org Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2019 17:42:29 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20191204224131.3384-2-nramas@linux.microsoft.com> References: <20191204224131.3384-1-nramas@linux.microsoft.com> <20191204224131.3384-2-nramas@linux.microsoft.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: 19121022-0028-0000-0000-000003C757F1 X-IBM-AV-DETECTION: SAVI=unused REMOTE=unused XFE=unused x-cbparentid: 19121022-0029-0000-0000-0000248A899B Message-Id: <1576017749.4579.40.camel@linux.ibm.com> X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.95,18.0.572 definitions=2019-12-10_07:2019-12-10,2019-12-10 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 mlxlogscore=999 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 malwarescore=0 spamscore=0 suspectscore=0 priorityscore=1501 mlxscore=0 phishscore=0 impostorscore=0 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-1910280000 definitions=main-1912100186 Sender: linux-integrity-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 2019-12-04 at 14:41 -0800, Lakshmi Ramasubramanian wrote: > Return immediately from process_buffer_measurement() > if the IMA policy flag is set to zero. Not doing this > can result in kernel panic when process_buffer_measurement() > is called before IMA is initialized (for instance, when > the IMA hook is called when a key is added to > the .builtin_trusted_keys keyring). > > This change adds the check in process_buffer_measurement() > to return immediately if ima_policy_flag is set to zero. Patch descriptions aren't suppose to be written as pseudo code.  Start with the current status and problem description. For example, "process_buffer_measurement() may be called prior to IMA being initialized, which would result in a kernel panic.  This patch ..." Mimi > > Signed-off-by: Lakshmi Ramasubramanian > --- > security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c | 3 +++ > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c b/security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c > index d7e987baf127..9b35db2fc777 100644 > --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c > +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c > @@ -655,6 +655,9 @@ void process_buffer_measurement(const void *buf, int size, > int action = 0; > u32 secid; > > + if (!ima_policy_flag) > + return; > + > /* > * Both LSM hooks and auxilary based buffer measurements are > * based on policy. To avoid code duplication, differentiate