public inbox for audit@vger.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox