Linux Integrity Measurement development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Petr Vorel <pvorel@suse.cz>
To: Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org, ltp@lists.linux.it,
	Stefan Berger <stefanb@linux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 3/3] ima: additional ToMToU violation tests
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2025 22:43:33 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250220214333.GA2726725@pevik> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2637152a2715b8e84e966b12bc9c9cb1c27592c2.camel@linux.ibm.com>

> On Thu, 2025-02-20 at 15:22 -0500, Mimi Zohar wrote:
> > On Thu, 2025-02-20 at 20:13 +0100, Petr Vorel wrote:
> > > > On Thu, 2025-02-20 at 19:16 +0100, Petr Vorel wrote:
> > > > > Hi Mimi,

> > > > > > Kernel patch "ima: limit the number of ToMToU integrity violations"
> > > > > > prevents superfluous ToMToU violations.  Add corresponding LTP tests.

> > > > > > Link:
> > > > > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-integrity/20250219162131.416719-3-zohar@linux.ibm.com/
> > > > > > Signed-off-by: Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com>

> > > > > Unfortunately tests fail on both mainline kernel and kernel with your patches.

> > > > The new LTP IMA violations patches should fail without the associated kernel
> > > > patches.

> > > > > Any hint what could be wrong?

> > > > Of course it's dependent on the IMA policy.  The tests assume being booted with the
> > > > IMA
> > > > TCB measurement policy or similar policy being loaded.  Can you share the IMA
> > > > policy?
> > > > e.g. cat /sys/kernel/security/ima/policy

> > > > thanks,

> > > > Mimi

> > > Now testing on kernel *with* your patches. First run always fails, regardless
> > > whether using ima_policy=tcb or
> > > /opt/ltp/testcases/data/ima_violations/violations.policy).

> > > Kind regards,
> > > Petr

> > I'm not seeing that on my test machine.  Could there be other things running on your
> > system causing violations.  In anycase, your original test was less exacting.  
> > Similarly,
> > instead of "-eq", try using "-qe" in the following test and removing the subsequent new
> > "gt" test.

> -> "-ge"

Sure, changing to -ge fixes the problem:
if [ $(($num_violations_new - $num_violations)) -ge $expected_violations ]; then

I guess we need "-ge" for older kernels (unless "fix" for stable).  Should we
accept "$expected_violations || $expected_violations + 1" for new kernels to
avoid problems like the one on my system.

I wonder if the problem was somehow caused by the fact that I built kernel. OTOH
it's build by OBS (official openSUSE build service).

I don't expect you'd have time to look into it, in case you're interested and
have time sending a links to rpm binary and src package.

https://download.opensuse.org/repositories/home:/pevik:/ima-limit-open-writers-ToMToU/standard/x86_64/kernel-default-6.14~rc3-1.1.gb6b4102.x86_64.rpm
https://download.opensuse.org/repositories/home:/pevik:/ima-limit-open-writers-ToMToU/standard/src/kernel-source-6.14~rc3-1.1.gb6b4102.src.rpm

Kind regards,
Petr

> > if [ $(($num_violations_new - $num_violations)) -eq $expected_violations ]; then



  reply	other threads:[~2025-02-20 21:43 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-02-20 16:00 [RFC PATCH 1/3] Update validate() to support multiple violations Mimi Zohar
2025-02-20 16:00 ` [RFC PATCH 2/3] ima: additional open-writer violation tests Mimi Zohar
2025-02-20 19:02   ` Petr Vorel
2025-02-20 16:00 ` [RFC PATCH 3/3] ima: additional ToMToU " Mimi Zohar
2025-02-20 18:16   ` Petr Vorel
2025-02-20 18:46     ` Petr Vorel
2025-02-20 21:15       ` Mimi Zohar
2025-02-20 18:59     ` Mimi Zohar
2025-02-20 19:13       ` Petr Vorel
2025-02-20 20:22         ` Mimi Zohar
2025-02-20 21:18           ` Mimi Zohar
2025-02-20 21:43             ` Petr Vorel [this message]
2025-02-21  2:07               ` Mimi Zohar
2025-02-21  8:16                 ` Petr Vorel
2025-02-24 18:48                   ` Mimi Zohar
2025-02-25  7:45                     ` Petr Vorel
2025-02-20 18:50 ` [RFC PATCH 1/3] Update validate() to support multiple violations Petr Vorel

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=20250220214333.GA2726725@pevik \
    --to=pvorel@suse.cz \
    --cc=linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=ltp@lists.linux.it \
    --cc=stefanb@linux.ibm.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