linux-integrity.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com>
To: Lakshmi Ramasubramanian <nramas@linux.microsoft.com>,
	James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>,
	linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org
Cc: sashal@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] IMA: Turn IMA_MEASURE_ASYMMETRIC_KEYS off by default
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2020 15:02:59 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1579723379.5182.130.camel@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ac6c559e-2d68-afcb-d316-6ac49a570831@linux.microsoft.com>

On Tue, 2020-01-21 at 12:38 -0800, Lakshmi Ramasubramanian wrote:
> On 1/21/2020 11:52 AM, James Bottomley wrote:
> 
> >> - really small devices/sensors being able to queue certificates
> > 
> > seems like the answer to this one would be don't queue.  I realise it's
> > after the submit design, but what about measuring when the key is added
> > if there's a policy otherwise measure the keyring when the policy is
> > added ... that way no queueing.
> 
> Without the "deferred key processing" changes, only keys added at 
> runtime were measured (if policy permitted).
> 
> "deferred key processing" enabled queuing keys added early in the boot 
> process and measured them when the policy is loaded.
> 
> We can make this (the queuing) optional through a config, but leave the 
> runtime key measurement auto-enabled (as is the config 
> IMA_MEASURE_ASYMMETRIC_KEYS now).

Thanks, Lakshmi.  This requires moving the code around.  Instead of
doing this on the current code base, I suggest posting a v9 version of
the entire "IMA: Deferred measurement of keys".

I suggest making the switch from spinlock to mutex, as you had it
originally, before posting v9.  The commit history will then be a lot
cleaner.

thanks,

Mimi


  reply	other threads:[~2020-01-22 20:03 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-01-21 17:13 [PATCH] IMA: Turn IMA_MEASURE_ASYMMETRIC_KEYS off by default Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2020-01-21 17:34 ` James Bottomley
2020-01-21 18:00   ` Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2020-01-21 19:13   ` Mimi Zohar
2020-01-21 19:52     ` James Bottomley
2020-01-21 20:38       ` Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2020-01-22 20:02         ` Mimi Zohar [this message]
2020-01-22 20:05           ` Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2020-01-22 20:54             ` Mimi Zohar
2020-01-22 12:23       ` 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=1579723379.5182.130.camel@linux.ibm.com \
    --to=zohar@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com \
    --cc=linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=nramas@linux.microsoft.com \
    --cc=sashal@kernel.org \
    /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).