From: Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com>
To: Casey Schaufler <casey@schaufler-ca.com>,
casey.schaufler@intel.com, jmorris@namei.org,
linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, selinux@vger.kernel.org,
Matthew Garrett <mjg59@google.com>
Cc: keescook@chromium.org, john.johansen@canonical.com,
penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp, paul@paul-moore.com,
sds@tycho.nsa.gov
Subject: Re: [PATCH v12 03/25] LSM: Use lsmblob in security_audit_rule_match
Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2019 12:14:57 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1577812497.5874.97.camel@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191224231915.7208-4-casey@schaufler-ca.com>
[Cc'ing Matthew Garret based on the additional bprm call to
process_measurement() - commit d906c10d8a31 ("IMA: Support using new
creds in appraisal policy")]
On Tue, 2019-12-24 at 15:18 -0800, Casey Schaufler wrote:
> diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c b/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c
> index f19a895ad7cd..193ddd55420b 100644
> --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c
> +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c
> @@ -414,6 +414,7 @@ static bool ima_match_rules(struct ima_rule_entry *rule, struct inode *inode,
> for (i = 0; i < MAX_LSM_RULES; i++) {
> int rc = 0;
> u32 osid;
> + struct lsmblob blob;
>
> if (!rule->lsm[i].rule)
> continue;
> @@ -423,7 +424,8 @@ static bool ima_match_rules(struct ima_rule_entry *rule, struct inode *inode,
> case LSM_OBJ_ROLE:
> case LSM_OBJ_TYPE:
> security_inode_getsecid(inode, &osid);
> - rc = security_filter_rule_match(osid,
> + lsmblob_init(&blob, osid);
> + rc = security_filter_rule_match(&blob,
> rule->lsm[i].type,
> Audit_equal,
> rule->lsm[i].rule);
> @@ -431,7 +433,8 @@ static bool ima_match_rules(struct ima_rule_entry *rule, struct inode *inode,
> case LSM_SUBJ_USER:
> case LSM_SUBJ_ROLE:
> case LSM_SUBJ_TYPE:
> - rc = security_filter_rule_match(secid,
> + lsmblob_init(&blob, secid);
> + rc = security_filter_rule_match(&blob,
On the bprm hook, IMA calls process_measurement() twice. The first
time the secid is passed as an argument based on a call to
security_task_getsecid(), while the second time it is based on
security_cred_getsecid(). process_measurement() passes the correct
secid converted to a blob, but instead of using the passed variable,
this code uses the locally defined blob field. A later patch removes
the the lsmblob_init(), leaving the local blob uninitialized.
Something is terribly wrong here.
Mimi
> rule->lsm[i].type,
> Audit_equal,
> rule->lsm[i].rule);
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-12-31 17:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20191224231915.7208-1-casey.ref@schaufler-ca.com>
2019-12-24 23:18 ` [PATCH v12 00/25] LSM: Module stacking for AppArmor Casey Schaufler
2019-12-24 23:18 ` [PATCH v12 01/25] LSM: Infrastructure management of the sock security Casey Schaufler
2019-12-24 23:18 ` [PATCH v12 02/25] LSM: Create and manage the lsmblob data structure Casey Schaufler
2019-12-24 23:18 ` [PATCH v12 03/25] LSM: Use lsmblob in security_audit_rule_match Casey Schaufler
2019-12-31 17:14 ` Mimi Zohar [this message]
2019-12-31 17:36 ` Casey Schaufler
2019-12-24 23:18 ` [PATCH v12 04/25] LSM: Use lsmblob in security_kernel_act_as Casey Schaufler
2019-12-24 23:18 ` [PATCH v12 05/25] net: Prepare UDS for security module stacking Casey Schaufler
2019-12-24 23:18 ` [PATCH v12 06/25] LSM: Use lsmblob in security_secctx_to_secid Casey Schaufler
2019-12-24 23:18 ` [PATCH v12 07/25] LSM: Use lsmblob in security_secid_to_secctx Casey Schaufler
2019-12-24 23:18 ` [PATCH v12 08/25] LSM: Use lsmblob in security_ipc_getsecid Casey Schaufler
2019-12-24 23:18 ` [PATCH v12 09/25] LSM: Use lsmblob in security_task_getsecid Casey Schaufler
2019-12-24 23:19 ` [PATCH v12 10/25] LSM: Use lsmblob in security_inode_getsecid Casey Schaufler
2019-12-24 23:19 ` [PATCH v12 11/25] LSM: Use lsmblob in security_cred_getsecid Casey Schaufler
2019-12-24 23:19 ` [PATCH v12 12/25] IMA: Change internal interfaces to use lsmblobs Casey Schaufler
2019-12-24 23:19 ` [PATCH v12 13/25] LSM: Specify which LSM to display Casey Schaufler
2019-12-24 23:19 ` [PATCH v12 14/25] LSM: Ensure the correct LSM context releaser Casey Schaufler
2019-12-24 23:19 ` [PATCH v12 15/25] LSM: Use lsmcontext in security_secid_to_secctx Casey Schaufler
2019-12-24 23:19 ` [PATCH v12 16/25] LSM: Use lsmcontext in security_dentry_init_security Casey Schaufler
2019-12-24 23:19 ` [PATCH v12 17/25] LSM: Use lsmcontext in security_inode_getsecctx Casey Schaufler
2019-12-24 23:19 ` [PATCH v12 18/25] LSM: security_secid_to_secctx in netlink netfilter Casey Schaufler
2019-12-24 23:19 ` [PATCH v12 19/25] NET: Store LSM netlabel data in a lsmblob Casey Schaufler
2019-12-24 23:19 ` [PATCH v12 20/25] LSM: Verify LSM display sanity in binder Casey Schaufler
2019-12-24 23:19 ` [PATCH v12 21/25] Audit: Add subj_LSM fields when necessary Casey Schaufler
2019-12-24 23:19 ` [PATCH v12 22/25] Audit: Include object data for all security modules Casey Schaufler
2019-12-24 23:19 ` [PATCH v12 23/25] NET: Add SO_PEERCONTEXT for multiple LSMs Casey Schaufler
2019-12-24 23:19 ` [PATCH v12 24/25] LSM: Add /proc attr entry for full LSM context Casey Schaufler
2019-12-24 23:19 ` [PATCH v12 25/25] AppArmor: Remove the exclusive flag Casey Schaufler
2019-12-24 23:58 ` [PATCH v12 00/25] LSM: Module stacking for AppArmor Casey Schaufler
2019-12-16 22:35 Casey Schaufler
2019-12-16 22:35 ` [PATCH v12 03/25] LSM: Use lsmblob in security_audit_rule_match Casey Schaufler
2019-12-17 17:34 ` Stephen Smalley
2019-12-17 22:01 ` Casey Schaufler
2019-12-17 23:47 ` Kees Cook
2019-12-18 0:28 ` Casey Schaufler
2019-12-18 13:16 ` Stephen Smalley
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2019-12-16 22:33 [PATCH v12 00/25] LSM: Module stacking for AppArmor Casey Schaufler
2019-12-16 22:33 ` [PATCH v12 03/25] LSM: Use lsmblob in security_audit_rule_match Casey Schaufler
2019-12-16 22:24 [PATCH v12 00/25] LSM: Module stacking for AppArmor Casey Schaufler
2019-12-16 22:24 ` [PATCH v12 03/25] LSM: Use lsmblob in security_audit_rule_match Casey Schaufler
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=1577812497.5874.97.camel@linux.ibm.com \
--to=zohar@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=casey.schaufler@intel.com \
--cc=casey@schaufler-ca.com \
--cc=jmorris@namei.org \
--cc=john.johansen@canonical.com \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mjg59@google.com \
--cc=paul@paul-moore.com \
--cc=penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp \
--cc=sds@tycho.nsa.gov \
--cc=selinux@vger.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.