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=-13.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER,INCLUDES_PATCH, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS 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 7BB19C4361B for ; Mon, 14 Dec 2020 11:01:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [216.205.24.124]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D1BD422BEF for ; Mon, 14 Dec 2020 11:01:01 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org D1BD422BEF Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.microsoft.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=tempfail smtp.mailfrom=dm-devel-bounces@redhat.com Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-313-v4fRsmblNj2kleIFs1hk5w-1; Mon, 14 Dec 2020 06:00:58 -0500 X-MC-Unique: v4fRsmblNj2kleIFs1hk5w-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2A9E4107AFB7; Mon, 14 Dec 2020 11:00:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from colo-mx.corp.redhat.com (colo-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.20]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B3E1572167; Mon, 14 Dec 2020 11:00:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists01.pubmisc.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com (lists01.pubmisc.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.19.33]) by colo-mx.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7887D1809CA4; Mon, 14 Dec 2020 11:00:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx04.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.4]) by lists01.pubmisc.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id 0BCJKVw4004789 for ; Sat, 12 Dec 2020 14:20:32 -0500 Received: by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) id A6D5A2026D48; Sat, 12 Dec 2020 19:20:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (mimecast02.extmail.prod.ext.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.55.18]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A1BB22026D47 for ; Sat, 12 Dec 2020 19:20:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from us-smtp-1.mimecast.com (us-smtp-2.mimecast.com [207.211.31.81]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 48EF48007D9 for ; Sat, 12 Dec 2020 19:20:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from linux.microsoft.com (linux.microsoft.com [13.77.154.182]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-207-vFUVJa7nNlStOjgXAyK_0w-1; Sat, 12 Dec 2020 14:20:26 -0500 X-MC-Unique: vFUVJa7nNlStOjgXAyK_0w-1 Received: from sequoia (162-237-133-238.lightspeed.rcsntx.sbcglobal.net [162.237.133.238]) by linux.microsoft.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E476820B717A; Sat, 12 Dec 2020 11:20:24 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 linux.microsoft.com E476820B717A Date: Sat, 12 Dec 2020 13:20:22 -0600 From: Tyler Hicks To: Tushar Sugandhi Message-ID: <20201212192022.GI4951@sequoia> References: <20201212180251.9943-1-tusharsu@linux.microsoft.com> <20201212180251.9943-5-tusharsu@linux.microsoft.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20201212180251.9943-5-tusharsu@linux.microsoft.com> X-Mimecast-Impersonation-Protect: Policy=CLT - Impersonation Protection Definition; Similar Internal Domain=false; Similar Monitored External Domain=false; Custom External Domain=false; Mimecast External Domain=false; Newly Observed Domain=false; Internal User Name=false; Custom Display Name List=false; Reply-to Address Mismatch=false; Targeted Threat Dictionary=false; Mimecast Threat Dictionary=false; Custom Threat Dictionary=false X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.78 on 10.11.54.4 X-loop: dm-devel@redhat.com X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 06:00:28 -0500 Cc: sashal@kernel.org, paul@paul-moore.com, snitzer@redhat.com, selinux@vger.kernel.org, stephen.smalley.work@gmail.com, jmorris@namei.org, zohar@linux.ibm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, nramas@linux.microsoft.com, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, casey@schaufler-ca.com, linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org, dm-devel@redhat.com, gmazyland@gmail.com, agk@redhat.com Subject: Re: [dm-devel] [PATCH v9 4/8] IMA: add policy rule to measure critical data X-BeenThere: dm-devel@redhat.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: junk List-Id: device-mapper development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: dm-devel-bounces@redhat.com Errors-To: dm-devel-bounces@redhat.com X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.11 Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=dm-devel-bounces@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 2020-12-12 10:02:47, Tushar Sugandhi wrote: > A new IMA policy rule is needed for the IMA hook > ima_measure_critical_data() and the corresponding func CRITICAL_DATA for > measuring the input buffer. The policy rule should ensure the buffer > would get measured only when the policy rule allows the action. The > policy rule should also support the necessary constraints (flags etc.) > for integrity critical buffer data measurements. > > Add a policy rule to define the constraints for restricting integrity > critical data measurements. > > Signed-off-by: Tushar Sugandhi This looks nice. Thanks for the changes! Reviewed-by: Tyler Hicks Tyler > --- > Documentation/ABI/testing/ima_policy | 2 +- > security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c | 29 ++++++++++++++++++++++++---- > 2 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/Documentation/ABI/testing/ima_policy b/Documentation/ABI/testing/ima_policy > index e35263f97fc1..6ec7daa87cba 100644 > --- a/Documentation/ABI/testing/ima_policy > +++ b/Documentation/ABI/testing/ima_policy > @@ -32,7 +32,7 @@ Description: > func:= [BPRM_CHECK][MMAP_CHECK][CREDS_CHECK][FILE_CHECK]MODULE_CHECK] > [FIRMWARE_CHECK] > [KEXEC_KERNEL_CHECK] [KEXEC_INITRAMFS_CHECK] > - [KEXEC_CMDLINE] [KEY_CHECK] > + [KEXEC_CMDLINE] [KEY_CHECK] [CRITICAL_DATA] > mask:= [[^]MAY_READ] [[^]MAY_WRITE] [[^]MAY_APPEND] > [[^]MAY_EXEC] > fsmagic:= hex value > diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c b/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c > index a09d1a41a290..d45c2dbb6d45 100644 > --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c > +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c > @@ -479,6 +479,8 @@ static bool ima_match_rule_data(struct ima_rule_entry *rule, > > opt_list = rule->keyrings; > break; > + case CRITICAL_DATA: > + return true; > default: > return false; > } > @@ -515,13 +517,19 @@ static bool ima_match_rules(struct ima_rule_entry *rule, struct inode *inode, > { > int i; > > - if (func == KEY_CHECK) { > - return (rule->flags & IMA_FUNC) && (rule->func == func) && > - ima_match_rule_data(rule, func_data, cred); > - } > if ((rule->flags & IMA_FUNC) && > (rule->func != func && func != POST_SETATTR)) > return false; > + > + switch (func) { > + case KEY_CHECK: > + case CRITICAL_DATA: > + return ((rule->func == func) && > + ima_match_rule_data(rule, func_data, cred)); > + default: > + break; > + } > + > if ((rule->flags & IMA_MASK) && > (rule->mask != mask && func != POST_SETATTR)) > return false; > @@ -1116,6 +1124,17 @@ static bool ima_validate_rule(struct ima_rule_entry *entry) > if (ima_rule_contains_lsm_cond(entry)) > return false; > > + break; > + case CRITICAL_DATA: > + if (entry->action & ~(MEASURE | DONT_MEASURE)) > + return false; > + > + if (entry->flags & ~(IMA_FUNC | IMA_UID | IMA_PCR)) > + return false; > + > + if (ima_rule_contains_lsm_cond(entry)) > + return false; > + > break; > default: > return false; > @@ -1248,6 +1267,8 @@ static int ima_parse_rule(char *rule, struct ima_rule_entry *entry) > else if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_IMA_MEASURE_ASYMMETRIC_KEYS) && > strcmp(args[0].from, "KEY_CHECK") == 0) > entry->func = KEY_CHECK; > + else if (strcmp(args[0].from, "CRITICAL_DATA") == 0) > + entry->func = CRITICAL_DATA; > else > result = -EINVAL; > if (!result) > -- > 2.17.1 > -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel 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=-23.2 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER, INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL 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 48080C4361B for ; Sat, 12 Dec 2020 19:21:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17D0622262 for ; Sat, 12 Dec 2020 19:21:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2501890AbgLLTVH (ORCPT ); Sat, 12 Dec 2020 14:21:07 -0500 Received: from linux.microsoft.com ([13.77.154.182]:60624 "EHLO linux.microsoft.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2501886AbgLLTVH (ORCPT ); Sat, 12 Dec 2020 14:21:07 -0500 Received: from sequoia (162-237-133-238.lightspeed.rcsntx.sbcglobal.net [162.237.133.238]) by linux.microsoft.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E476820B717A; Sat, 12 Dec 2020 11:20:24 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 linux.microsoft.com E476820B717A DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.microsoft.com; s=default; t=1607800825; bh=5ksj1UHNuBAABEl+/jn4cYgqXNXCmJX9vdNbEeENg08=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=fBhBKQvHgJRUcQcgKM74P1aJ6cgivcillH1PmeggevYop5Ti3TGuGp+67Sewyn0tV NFaTeGUZsU30e8h422XiZeMfdr8ABKDyBOLHSK5/6YD9qc/mCpiiVjGWFuffIaTsOt pJpEPTSDysfNA86LdIPV0w0LX0cVc+sxn1vv28yw= Date: Sat, 12 Dec 2020 13:20:22 -0600 From: Tyler Hicks To: Tushar Sugandhi Cc: zohar@linux.ibm.com, stephen.smalley.work@gmail.com, casey@schaufler-ca.com, agk@redhat.com, snitzer@redhat.com, gmazyland@gmail.com, paul@paul-moore.com, sashal@kernel.org, jmorris@namei.org, nramas@linux.microsoft.com, linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org, selinux@vger.kernel.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dm-devel@redhat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 4/8] IMA: add policy rule to measure critical data Message-ID: <20201212192022.GI4951@sequoia> References: <20201212180251.9943-1-tusharsu@linux.microsoft.com> <20201212180251.9943-5-tusharsu@linux.microsoft.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20201212180251.9943-5-tusharsu@linux.microsoft.com> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org On 2020-12-12 10:02:47, Tushar Sugandhi wrote: > A new IMA policy rule is needed for the IMA hook > ima_measure_critical_data() and the corresponding func CRITICAL_DATA for > measuring the input buffer. The policy rule should ensure the buffer > would get measured only when the policy rule allows the action. The > policy rule should also support the necessary constraints (flags etc.) > for integrity critical buffer data measurements. > > Add a policy rule to define the constraints for restricting integrity > critical data measurements. > > Signed-off-by: Tushar Sugandhi This looks nice. Thanks for the changes! Reviewed-by: Tyler Hicks Tyler > --- > Documentation/ABI/testing/ima_policy | 2 +- > security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c | 29 ++++++++++++++++++++++++---- > 2 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/Documentation/ABI/testing/ima_policy b/Documentation/ABI/testing/ima_policy > index e35263f97fc1..6ec7daa87cba 100644 > --- a/Documentation/ABI/testing/ima_policy > +++ b/Documentation/ABI/testing/ima_policy > @@ -32,7 +32,7 @@ Description: > func:= [BPRM_CHECK][MMAP_CHECK][CREDS_CHECK][FILE_CHECK]MODULE_CHECK] > [FIRMWARE_CHECK] > [KEXEC_KERNEL_CHECK] [KEXEC_INITRAMFS_CHECK] > - [KEXEC_CMDLINE] [KEY_CHECK] > + [KEXEC_CMDLINE] [KEY_CHECK] [CRITICAL_DATA] > mask:= [[^]MAY_READ] [[^]MAY_WRITE] [[^]MAY_APPEND] > [[^]MAY_EXEC] > fsmagic:= hex value > diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c b/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c > index a09d1a41a290..d45c2dbb6d45 100644 > --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c > +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c > @@ -479,6 +479,8 @@ static bool ima_match_rule_data(struct ima_rule_entry *rule, > > opt_list = rule->keyrings; > break; > + case CRITICAL_DATA: > + return true; > default: > return false; > } > @@ -515,13 +517,19 @@ static bool ima_match_rules(struct ima_rule_entry *rule, struct inode *inode, > { > int i; > > - if (func == KEY_CHECK) { > - return (rule->flags & IMA_FUNC) && (rule->func == func) && > - ima_match_rule_data(rule, func_data, cred); > - } > if ((rule->flags & IMA_FUNC) && > (rule->func != func && func != POST_SETATTR)) > return false; > + > + switch (func) { > + case KEY_CHECK: > + case CRITICAL_DATA: > + return ((rule->func == func) && > + ima_match_rule_data(rule, func_data, cred)); > + default: > + break; > + } > + > if ((rule->flags & IMA_MASK) && > (rule->mask != mask && func != POST_SETATTR)) > return false; > @@ -1116,6 +1124,17 @@ static bool ima_validate_rule(struct ima_rule_entry *entry) > if (ima_rule_contains_lsm_cond(entry)) > return false; > > + break; > + case CRITICAL_DATA: > + if (entry->action & ~(MEASURE | DONT_MEASURE)) > + return false; > + > + if (entry->flags & ~(IMA_FUNC | IMA_UID | IMA_PCR)) > + return false; > + > + if (ima_rule_contains_lsm_cond(entry)) > + return false; > + > break; > default: > return false; > @@ -1248,6 +1267,8 @@ static int ima_parse_rule(char *rule, struct ima_rule_entry *entry) > else if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_IMA_MEASURE_ASYMMETRIC_KEYS) && > strcmp(args[0].from, "KEY_CHECK") == 0) > entry->func = KEY_CHECK; > + else if (strcmp(args[0].from, "CRITICAL_DATA") == 0) > + entry->func = CRITICAL_DATA; > else > result = -EINVAL; > if (!result) > -- > 2.17.1 >