linux-integrity.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Matthew Garrett <mjg59@google.com>, linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] IMA: Allow EVM validation on appraisal even without a symmetric key
Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2017 22:08:02 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1506823682.5691.173.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170927221653.11219-2-mjg59@google.com>

On Wed, 2017-09-27 at 15:16 -0700, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> A reasonable configuration is to use IMA to appraise a subset of files
> (based on user, security label or other features supported by IMA) but
> to also want to use EVM to validate not only the state of the IMA hash
> but also additional metadata on the file. Right now this is only
> possible if a symmetric key has been loaded, which may not be desirable
> in all cases (eg, one where EVM digital signatures are shipped to end
> systems rather than EVM HMACs being generated locally). 

Commit 26ddabfe96bb "evm: enable EVM when X509 certificate is loaded"
already allows EVM to be enabled without loading a symmetric key.

Mimi

> Add an
> additional "require_evm" keyword to the IMA policy language in order to
> permit the local admin to indicate that they wish EVM validation to
> occur even if no symmetric key has been loaded.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Matthew Garrett <mjg59@google.com>
> ---
>  Documentation/ABI/testing/ima_policy  |  3 ++-
>  include/linux/evm.h                   |  6 ++++--
>  security/integrity/evm/evm_main.c     |  6 ++++--
>  security/integrity/ima/ima_appraise.c | 11 ++++++++++-
>  security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c   | 12 +++++++++++-
>  security/integrity/integrity.h        |  3 ++-
>  6 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/ABI/testing/ima_policy b/Documentation/ABI/testing/ima_policy
> index 5dc9eed035fb..ea2703c847f6 100644
> --- a/Documentation/ABI/testing/ima_policy
> +++ b/Documentation/ABI/testing/ima_policy
> @@ -23,7 +23,8 @@ Description:
>  				[euid=] [fowner=]]
>  			lsm:	[[subj_user=] [subj_role=] [subj_type=]
>  				 [obj_user=] [obj_role=] [obj_type=]]
> -			option:	[[appraise_type=]] [permit_directio]
> +			option:	[[appraise_type=] [permit_directio]
> +			         [require_evm]]
> 
>  		base: 	func:= [BPRM_CHECK][MMAP_CHECK][CREDS_CHECK][FILE_CHECK][MODULE_CHECK]
>  				[FIRMWARE_CHECK]
> diff --git a/include/linux/evm.h b/include/linux/evm.h
> index 35ed9a8a403a..7661f3085942 100644
> --- a/include/linux/evm.h
> +++ b/include/linux/evm.h
> @@ -19,7 +19,8 @@ extern enum integrity_status evm_verifyxattr(struct dentry *dentry,
>  					     const char *xattr_name,
>  					     void *xattr_value,
>  					     size_t xattr_value_len,
> -					     struct integrity_iint_cache *iint);
> +					     struct integrity_iint_cache *iint,
> +					     bool force);
>  extern int evm_inode_setattr(struct dentry *dentry, struct iattr *attr);
>  extern void evm_inode_post_setattr(struct dentry *dentry, int ia_valid);
>  extern int evm_inode_setxattr(struct dentry *dentry, const char *name,
> @@ -54,7 +55,8 @@ static inline enum integrity_status evm_verifyxattr(struct dentry *dentry,
>  						    const char *xattr_name,
>  						    void *xattr_value,
>  						    size_t xattr_value_len,
> -					struct integrity_iint_cache *iint)
> +					      struct integrity_iint_cache *iint,
> +						    bool force)
>  {
>  	return INTEGRITY_UNKNOWN;
>  }
> diff --git a/security/integrity/evm/evm_main.c b/security/integrity/evm/evm_main.c
> index 063d38aef64e..44e4f4fda965 100644
> --- a/security/integrity/evm/evm_main.c
> +++ b/security/integrity/evm/evm_main.c
> @@ -223,6 +223,7 @@ static int evm_protected_xattr(const char *req_xattr_name)
>   * @xattr_name: requested xattr
>   * @xattr_value: requested xattr value
>   * @xattr_value_len: requested xattr value length
> + * @force: force verification even if no EVM symmetric key is loaded
>   *
>   * Calculate the HMAC for the given dentry and verify it against the stored
>   * security.evm xattr. For performance, use the xattr value and length
> @@ -236,9 +237,10 @@ static int evm_protected_xattr(const char *req_xattr_name)
>  enum integrity_status evm_verifyxattr(struct dentry *dentry,
>  				      const char *xattr_name,
>  				      void *xattr_value, size_t xattr_value_len,
> -				      struct integrity_iint_cache *iint)
> +				      struct integrity_iint_cache *iint,
> +				      bool force)
>  {
> -	if (!evm_initialized || !evm_protected_xattr(xattr_name))
> +	if ((!evm_initialized || !evm_protected_xattr(xattr_name)) && !force)
>  		return INTEGRITY_UNKNOWN;
> 
>  	if (!iint) {
> diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_appraise.c b/security/integrity/ima/ima_appraise.c
> index edb82e722a0d..9df1148f17cc 100644
> --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_appraise.c
> +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_appraise.c
> @@ -217,6 +217,7 @@ int ima_appraise_measurement(enum ima_hooks func,
>  	struct inode *inode = d_backing_inode(dentry);
>  	enum integrity_status status = INTEGRITY_UNKNOWN;
>  	int rc = xattr_len, hash_start = 0;
> +	bool evm_force = false;
> 
>  	if (!(inode->i_opflags & IOP_XATTR))
>  		return INTEGRITY_UNKNOWN;
> @@ -236,7 +237,15 @@ int ima_appraise_measurement(enum ima_hooks func,
>  		goto out;
>  	}
> 
> -	status = evm_verifyxattr(dentry, XATTR_NAME_IMA, xattr_value, rc, iint);
> +	/*
> +	 * Check if policy specifies that we should perform EVM
> +	 * validation even in the absence of an EVM symmetric key
> +	 */
> +	if (iint->flags & IMA_EVM_REQUIRED)
> +		evm_force = true;
> +
> +	status = evm_verifyxattr(dentry, XATTR_NAME_IMA, xattr_value, rc, iint,
> +				 evm_force);
>  	if ((status != INTEGRITY_PASS) && (status != INTEGRITY_UNKNOWN)) {
>  		if ((status == INTEGRITY_NOLABEL)
>  		    || (status == INTEGRITY_NOXATTRS))
> diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c b/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c
> index a6e14c532627..db4a0c968e00 100644
> --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c
> +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c
> @@ -531,7 +531,7 @@ enum {
>  	Opt_uid_gt, Opt_euid_gt, Opt_fowner_gt,
>  	Opt_uid_lt, Opt_euid_lt, Opt_fowner_lt,
>  	Opt_appraise_type, Opt_permit_directio,
> -	Opt_pcr
> +	Opt_pcr, Opt_require_evm,
>  };
> 
>  static match_table_t policy_tokens = {
> @@ -562,6 +562,7 @@ static match_table_t policy_tokens = {
>  	{Opt_appraise_type, "appraise_type=%s"},
>  	{Opt_permit_directio, "permit_directio"},
>  	{Opt_pcr, "pcr=%s"},
> +	{Opt_require_evm, "require_evm"},
>  	{Opt_err, NULL}
>  };
> 
> @@ -876,6 +877,13 @@ static int ima_parse_rule(char *rule, struct ima_rule_entry *entry)
>  			else
>  				entry->flags |= IMA_PCR;
> 
> +			break;
> +		case Opt_require_evm:
> +			if (entry->action != APPRAISE) {
> +				result = -EINVAL;
> +				break;
> +			}
> +			entry->flags |= IMA_EVM_REQUIRED;
>  			break;
>  		case Opt_err:
>  			ima_log_string(ab, "UNKNOWN", p);
> @@ -1142,6 +1150,8 @@ int ima_policy_show(struct seq_file *m, void *v)
>  			}
>  		}
>  	}
> +	if (entry->flags & IMA_EVM_REQUIRED)
> +		seq_puts(m, "require_evm ");
>  	if (entry->flags & IMA_DIGSIG_REQUIRED)
>  		seq_puts(m, "appraise_type=imasig ");
>  	if (entry->flags & IMA_PERMIT_DIRECTIO)
> diff --git a/security/integrity/integrity.h b/security/integrity/integrity.h
> index 45ba0e4501d6..2fa0d7bc55fb 100644
> --- a/security/integrity/integrity.h
> +++ b/security/integrity/integrity.h
> @@ -28,11 +28,12 @@
> 
>  /* iint cache flags */
>  #define IMA_ACTION_FLAGS	0xff000000
> -#define IMA_ACTION_RULE_FLAGS	0x06000000
> +#define IMA_ACTION_RULE_FLAGS	0x16000000
>  #define IMA_DIGSIG		0x01000000
>  #define IMA_DIGSIG_REQUIRED	0x02000000
>  #define IMA_PERMIT_DIRECTIO	0x04000000
>  #define IMA_NEW_FILE		0x08000000
> +#define IMA_EVM_REQUIRED	0x10000000
> 
>  #define IMA_DO_MASK		(IMA_MEASURE | IMA_APPRAISE | IMA_AUDIT | \
>  				 IMA_APPRAISE_SUBMASK)

  reply	other threads:[~2017-10-01  2:08 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 45+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-09-27 22:16 RFC: Make it practical to ship EVM signatures Matthew Garrett
2017-09-27 22:16 ` [PATCH 1/6] IMA: Allow EVM validation on appraisal even without a symmetric key Matthew Garrett
2017-10-01  2:08   ` Mimi Zohar [this message]
2017-10-02 17:02     ` Matthew Garrett
2017-10-02 19:41       ` Mimi Zohar
2017-09-27 22:16 ` [PATCH 2/6] EVM: Add infrastructure for making EVM fields optional Matthew Garrett
2017-09-27 22:16 ` [PATCH 3/6] EVM: Allow userland to override the default EVM attributes Matthew Garrett
2017-09-27 22:16 ` [PATCH 4/6] EVM: Add an hmac_ng xattr format Matthew Garrett
2017-09-27 22:16 ` [PATCH 5/6] EVM: Write out HMAC xattrs in the new format Matthew Garrett
2017-09-27 22:16 ` [PATCH 6/6] EVM: Add a new digital signature format Matthew Garrett
2017-09-28 20:12 ` RFC: Make it practical to ship EVM signatures Mimi Zohar
2017-09-28 21:13   ` Matthew Garrett
2017-09-29  0:53     ` Mimi Zohar
2017-09-29 18:09       ` Matthew Garrett
2017-09-29 19:02         ` Mimi Zohar
2017-09-29 19:17           ` Matthew Garrett
2017-09-29 20:01             ` Mimi Zohar
2017-09-29 20:09               ` Matthew Garrett
2017-10-01  2:36                 ` Mimi Zohar
2017-10-02 17:09                   ` Matthew Garrett
2017-10-02 19:54                     ` Mimi Zohar
     [not found]                       ` <CACdnJutYw7Pgh-EwWuwp9Wz+5KzoreZVr+c6UV30zC__8FZSVA@mail.gmail.com>
     [not found]                         ` <1506974574.5691.304.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
2017-10-02 20:07                           ` Matthew Garrett
2017-10-09 17:51                 ` Mimi Zohar
2017-10-09 17:59                   ` Matthew Garrett
2017-10-09 18:15                     ` Mimi Zohar
2017-10-09 18:18                       ` Matthew Garrett
2017-10-09 18:40                         ` Mimi Zohar
     [not found]                           ` <20171009232314.545de76a@totoro>
     [not found]                             ` <1507583449.3748.46.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
     [not found]                               ` <20171010003326.6409ae23@totoro>
2017-10-09 21:40                                 ` Mimi Zohar
2017-10-09 23:10                                   ` Mikhail Kurinnoi
2017-10-10 19:07                                     ` Mimi Zohar
2017-10-12 23:09                                       ` Dmitry Kasatkin
2017-10-18 19:48                                         ` Dmitry Kasatkin
2017-10-18 20:30                                           ` Mimi Zohar
2017-10-18 20:37                                             ` Dmitry Kasatkin
2017-10-18 21:02                                               ` Mikhail Kurinnoi
2017-10-18 21:07                                               ` Mimi Zohar
2017-10-19 10:14                                                 ` Dmitry Kasatkin
2017-10-19 11:43                                                   ` Mimi Zohar
2017-10-19 17:08                                                   ` Matthew Garrett
2017-10-19 18:38                                                     ` Dmitry Kasatkin
2017-10-19 10:36                                                 ` Dmitry Kasatkin
2017-10-19 11:45                                                   ` Mimi Zohar
2017-10-02 14:53           ` Roberto Sassu
2017-10-02  8:55       ` Roberto Sassu
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2017-10-19 16:12 [PATCH 1/6] IMA: Allow EVM validation on appraisal even without a symmetric key Dmitry Kasatkin

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=1506823682.5691.173.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --to=zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mjg59@google.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).