From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from h2.hallyn.com ([78.46.35.8]:54090 "EHLO h2.hallyn.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751781AbdKTQwI (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 Nov 2017 11:52:08 -0500 Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2017 10:52:06 -0600 From: "Serge E. Hallyn" To: Mimi Zohar Cc: Roberto Sassu , "Serge E. Hallyn" , linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, silviu.vlasceanu@huawei.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 06/15] ima: add parser of digest lists metadata Message-ID: <20171120165206.GA14752@mail.hallyn.com> References: <20171107103710.10883-1-roberto.sassu@huawei.com> <20171107103710.10883-7-roberto.sassu@huawei.com> <20171118042030.GA13456@mail.hallyn.com> <1511047410.5920.111.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <175600e1-c472-69fc-2b4d-4255d8e827b5@huawei.com> <1511186020.4729.66.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 In-Reply-To: <1511186020.4729.66.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Sender: linux-integrity-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Quoting Mimi Zohar (zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com): > On Mon, 2017-11-20 at 10:40 +0100, Roberto Sassu wrote: > > On 11/19/2017 12:23 AM, Mimi Zohar wrote: > > > Hi Serge, > > > > > > On Fri, 2017-11-17 at 22:20 -0600, Serge E. Hallyn wrote: > > >> On Tue, Nov 07, 2017 at 11:37:01AM +0100, Roberto Sassu wrote: > > >>> from a predefined position (/etc/ima/digest_lists/metadata), when rootfs > > >>> becomes available. Digest lists must be loaded before IMA appraisal is in > > >>> enforcing mode. > > >> > > >> I'm sure there's a good reason for it, but this seems weird to me. > > >> Why read it from a file on disk instead of accepting it through say > > >> a securityfile write? > > > > There are two reasons. > > > > Digest lists must be loaded before any file is accessed, otherwise IMA > > will deny the operation if appraisal is in enforcing mode. With digest > > lists it is possible to appraise files in the initial ram disk without > > including extended attributes (the default policy excludes those files). > > There are a number of people interested in extending CPIO to support > extended attributes, not just for IMA-appraisal. (Years ago I started > but unfortunately haven't had time to finish it.) Isn't the right > solution to add extended attribute support to CPIO? (For the record) Yes, yes it is.