Re: [PATCH v4 16/16] ima: Setup securityfs for IMA namespace

Stefan Berger
2021-12-08T15:40:15Z

On 12/8/21 07:58, Christian Brauner wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 07, 2021 at 03:21:27PM -0500, Stefan Berger wrote:
>>
>> #if defined(CONFIG_IMA_APPRAISE) && defined(CONFIG_INTEGRITY_TRUSTED_KEYRING)
>> diff --git a/security/inode.c b/security/inode.c
>> index 121ac1874dde..10ee20917f42 100644
>> --- a/security/inode.c
>> +++ b/security/inode.c
>> @@ -16,6 +16,7 @@
>> #include <linux/fs_context.h>
>> #include <linux/mount.h>
>> #include <linux/pagemap.h>
>> +#include <linux/ima.h>
>> #include <linux/init.h>
>> #include <linux/namei.h>
>> #include <linux/security.h>
>> @@ -41,6 +42,7 @@ static const struct super_operations securityfs_super_operations = {
>> static int securityfs_fill_super(struct super_block *sb, struct fs_context *fc)
>> {
>> static const struct tree_descr files[] = {{""}};
>> + struct user_namespace *ns = fc->user_ns;
>> int error;
>>
>> error = simple_fill_super(sb, SECURITYFS_MAGIC, files);
>> @@ -49,7 +51,10 @@ static int securityfs_fill_super(struct super_block *sb, struct fs_context *fc)
>>
>> sb->s_op = &securityfs_super_operations;
>>
>> - return 0;
>> + if (ns != &init_user_ns)
>> + error = ima_fs_ns_init(ns, sb->s_root);
>> +
>> + return error;
>> }
>>
>> static int securityfs_get_tree(struct fs_context *fc)
>> @@ -69,6 +74,11 @@ static int securityfs_init_fs_context(struct fs_context *fc)
>>
>> static void securityfs_kill_super(struct super_block *sb)
>> {
>> + struct user_namespace *ns = sb->s_fs_info;
>> +
>> + if (ns != &init_user_ns)
>> + ima_fs_ns_free_dentries(ns);
> Say securityfs is unmounted. Then all the inodes and dentries become
> invalid. It's not allowed to hold on to any dentries or inodes after the
> super_block is shut down. So I just want to be sure that nothing in ima
> can access these dentries after securityfs is unmounted.

> To put it another way: why are they stored in struct ima_namespace in
> the first place? If you don't pin a filesystem when creating files or
> directories like you do for securityfs in init_ima_ns then you don't
> need to hold on to them as they will be automatically be wiped during
> umount.

The reason was so that securityfs for init_ima_ns and IMA namespaces
could share the code assigning to dentries to keep around and can clean
up if an error occurs while creating a dentry.

What about this: We keep the dentries in the ima_namespace, modify the
code creating the dentries in securityfs_create_dentry() to only take
the additional reference in case of init_user_ns (I suppose this is what
you suggest) and then keep 'static void ima_fs_ns_free_dentries()' only
for removing the dentries for the error case and never call it from
securityfs_kill_super()? Would that be acceptable?