All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Mickaël Salaün" <mic@digikod.net>
To: Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org, roberto.sassu@huawei.com,
	 linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jeff Xu <jeffxu@chromium.org>,
	 Kees Cook <kees@kernel.org>, Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore.com>,
	audit@vger.kernel.org,  Fan Wu <wufan@linux.microsoft.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] ima: instantiate the bprm_creds_for_exec() hook
Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2024 11:15:49 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20241204.IeZeTheing4e@digikod.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20241203233424.287880-1-zohar@linux.ibm.com>

On Tue, Dec 03, 2024 at 06:34:24PM -0500, Mimi Zohar wrote:
> Like direct file execution (e.g. ./script.sh), indirect file exection
> (e.g. sh script.sh) needs to be measured and appraised.  Instantiate
> the new security_bprm_creds_for_exec() hook to measure and verify the
> indirect file's integrity.  Unlike direct file execution, indirect file
> execution is optionally enforced by the interpreter.
> 
> Differentiate kernel and userspace enforced integrity audit messages.
> 

I guess there is a missing tag:

Co-developed-by: Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@huawei.com>

> Signed-off-by: Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@huawei.com>
> Signed-off-by: Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com>

With some minor comments, this looks good to me. I'll include this patch
or the next one in my patch series.  Thanks!

> ---
> Changelog v2:
> - Mickael: Use same audit messages with new audit message number
> - Stefan Berger: Return boolean from is_bprm_creds_for_exec() 
> 
>  include/uapi/linux/audit.h            |  1 +
>  security/integrity/ima/ima_appraise.c | 28 +++++++++++++++++++++++++--
>  security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c     | 22 +++++++++++++++++++++
>  3 files changed, 49 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/audit.h b/include/uapi/linux/audit.h
> index 75e21a135483..826337905466 100644
> --- a/include/uapi/linux/audit.h
> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/audit.h
> @@ -161,6 +161,7 @@
>  #define AUDIT_INTEGRITY_RULE	    1805 /* policy rule */
>  #define AUDIT_INTEGRITY_EVM_XATTR   1806 /* New EVM-covered xattr */
>  #define AUDIT_INTEGRITY_POLICY_RULE 1807 /* IMA policy rules */
> +#define AUDIT_INTEGRITY_DATA_CHECK  1808 /* Userspace enforced data integrity */
>  
>  #define AUDIT_KERNEL		2000	/* Asynchronous audit record. NOT A REQUEST. */
>  
> diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_appraise.c b/security/integrity/ima/ima_appraise.c
> index 656c709b974f..144e0b39fbcd 100644
> --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_appraise.c
> +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_appraise.c
> @@ -8,6 +8,7 @@
>  #include <linux/module.h>
>  #include <linux/init.h>
>  #include <linux/file.h>
> +#include <linux/binfmts.h>
>  #include <linux/fs.h>
>  #include <linux/xattr.h>
>  #include <linux/magic.h>
> @@ -469,6 +470,18 @@ int ima_check_blacklist(struct ima_iint_cache *iint,
>  	return rc;
>  }
>  
> +static bool is_bprm_creds_for_exec(enum ima_hooks func, struct file *file)
> +{
> +	struct linux_binprm *bprm = NULL;
> +
> +	if (func == BPRM_CHECK) {

struct linux_binprm *bprm;

> +		bprm = container_of(&file, struct linux_binprm, file);
> +		if (bprm->is_check)
> +			return true;

return bprm->is_check;

> +	}
> +	return false;
> +}
> +
>  /*
>   * ima_appraise_measurement - appraise file measurement
>   *
> @@ -483,6 +496,7 @@ int ima_appraise_measurement(enum ima_hooks func, struct ima_iint_cache *iint,
>  			     int xattr_len, const struct modsig *modsig)
>  {
>  	static const char op[] = "appraise_data";
> +	int audit_msgno = AUDIT_INTEGRITY_DATA;
>  	const char *cause = "unknown";
>  	struct dentry *dentry = file_dentry(file);
>  	struct inode *inode = d_backing_inode(dentry);
> @@ -494,6 +508,16 @@ int ima_appraise_measurement(enum ima_hooks func, struct ima_iint_cache *iint,
>  	if (!(inode->i_opflags & IOP_XATTR) && !try_modsig)
>  		return INTEGRITY_UNKNOWN;
>  
> +	/*
> +	 * Unlike any of the other LSM hooks where the kernel enforces file
> +	 * integrity, enforcing file integrity for the bprm_creds_for_exec()
> +	 * LSM hook with the AT_EXECVE_CHECK flag is left up to the discretion
> +	 * of the script interpreter(userspace). Differentiate kernel and
> +	 * userspace enforced integrity audit messages.
> +	 */
> +	if (is_bprm_creds_for_exec(func, file))
> +		audit_msgno = AUDIT_INTEGRITY_DATA_CHECK;
> +
>  	/* If reading the xattr failed and there's no modsig, error out. */
>  	if (rc <= 0 && !try_modsig) {
>  		if (rc && rc != -ENODATA)
> @@ -569,7 +593,7 @@ int ima_appraise_measurement(enum ima_hooks func, struct ima_iint_cache *iint,
>  	     (iint->flags & IMA_FAIL_UNVERIFIABLE_SIGS))) {
>  		status = INTEGRITY_FAIL;
>  		cause = "unverifiable-signature";
> -		integrity_audit_msg(AUDIT_INTEGRITY_DATA, inode, filename,
> +		integrity_audit_msg(audit_msgno, inode, filename,
>  				    op, cause, rc, 0);
>  	} else if (status != INTEGRITY_PASS) {
>  		/* Fix mode, but don't replace file signatures. */
> @@ -589,7 +613,7 @@ int ima_appraise_measurement(enum ima_hooks func, struct ima_iint_cache *iint,
>  			status = INTEGRITY_PASS;
>  		}
>  
> -		integrity_audit_msg(AUDIT_INTEGRITY_DATA, inode, filename,
> +		integrity_audit_msg(audit_msgno, inode, filename,
>  				    op, cause, rc, 0);
>  	} else {
>  		ima_cache_flags(iint, func);
> diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c b/security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c
> index 06132cf47016..f0830e6d0cda 100644
> --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c
> +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c
> @@ -554,6 +554,27 @@ static int ima_bprm_check(struct linux_binprm *bprm)
>  				   MAY_EXEC, CREDS_CHECK);
>  }
>  
> +/**
> + * ima_bprm_creds_for_exec - collect/store/appraise measurement.
> + * @bprm: contains the linux_binprm structure
> + *
> + * Based on the IMA policy and the execvat(2) AT_CHECK flag, measure and

AT_EXECVE_CHECK

> + * appraise the integrity of a file to be executed by script interpreters.
> + * Unlike any of the other LSM hooks where the kernel enforces file integrity,
> + * enforcing file integrity is left up to the discretion of the script
> + * interpreter (userspace).
> + *
> + * On success return 0.  On integrity appraisal error, assuming the file
> + * is in policy and IMA-appraisal is in enforcing mode, return -EACCES.
> + */
> +static int ima_bprm_creds_for_exec(struct linux_binprm *bprm)
> +{

We could have a comment explaining that ima_bprm_check() will not be
called a second time bi the bprm_check_security hook if bprm->is_check
is true because this hook would then not be called.  This would not be a
security issue anyway, just a useless call.

> +	if (!bprm->is_check)
> +		return 0;
> +
> +	return ima_bprm_check(bprm);
> +}
> +
>  /**
>   * ima_file_check - based on policy, collect/store measurement.
>   * @file: pointer to the file to be measured
> @@ -1177,6 +1198,7 @@ static int __init init_ima(void)
>  
>  static struct security_hook_list ima_hooks[] __ro_after_init = {
>  	LSM_HOOK_INIT(bprm_check_security, ima_bprm_check),
> +	LSM_HOOK_INIT(bprm_creds_for_exec, ima_bprm_creds_for_exec),
>  	LSM_HOOK_INIT(file_post_open, ima_file_check),
>  	LSM_HOOK_INIT(inode_post_create_tmpfile, ima_post_create_tmpfile),
>  	LSM_HOOK_INIT(file_release, ima_file_free),
> -- 
> 2.47.0
> 
> 

  reply	other threads:[~2024-12-04 10:16 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-12-03 23:34 [PATCH v2] ima: instantiate the bprm_creds_for_exec() hook Mimi Zohar
2024-12-04 10:15 ` Mickaël Salaün [this message]
2024-12-04 14:57   ` Mimi Zohar
2024-12-04 17:47     ` Mickaël Salaün
2024-12-04 19:01 ` Stefan Berger
2024-12-05 10:53   ` Mickaël Salaün
2024-12-05 15:44 ` Stefan Berger
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2024-12-04 19:25 Mimi Zohar
2024-12-04 19:27 ` Mimi Zohar
2024-12-06  0:30 ` Paul Moore
2024-12-06  3:10   ` Mimi Zohar
2024-12-10 16:34     ` Mickaël Salaün
2024-12-10 16:47       ` Mimi Zohar

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=20241204.IeZeTheing4e@digikod.net \
    --to=mic@digikod.net \
    --cc=audit@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=jeffxu@chromium.org \
    --cc=kees@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=paul@paul-moore.com \
    --cc=roberto.sassu@huawei.com \
    --cc=wufan@linux.microsoft.com \
    --cc=zohar@linux.ibm.com \
    /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.