From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-integrity-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mail-oi0-f52.google.com ([209.85.218.52]:53989 "EHLO
        mail-oi0-f52.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1751570AbdJSKg6 (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org>);
        Thu, 19 Oct 2017 06:36:58 -0400
Received: by mail-oi0-f52.google.com with SMTP id h6so13720426oia.10
        for <linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org>; Thu, 19 Oct 2017 03:36:58 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <1508360841.4510.64.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
References: <20170927221653.11219-1-mjg59@google.com> <1506629560.5691.33.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
 <CACdnJuuveRvCx57ZnYmRWbiwh3XU7AbxZD2W-Gq_dh_h_6L9Mg@mail.gmail.com>
 <1506646397.5691.64.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <CACdnJuueNfLdDnCsmotGhLC58cJXXh35FeZzipJ_ZshScPM=qA@mail.gmail.com>
 <1506711726.5691.141.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <CACdnJuvYNnePfz4H-D=DGMHbrbmZ52JWFoLqX120ALV=o4wwcw@mail.gmail.com>
 <1506715304.5691.151.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <CACdnJutXT6yU70R07m7Nd=7d6RbZr0Nti_r54Z7CffiK2r17zA@mail.gmail.com>
 <1507571511.3748.9.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <CACdnJuv8QSkVNWf7FY2-jakiO2sd8gh1oRTji4w3fvic54kfmA@mail.gmail.com>
 <1507572900.3748.21.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <CACdnJuvOW0Pc42Nuh4QVy4xdYsaUa=H9i=YZW+XB+bg-YnDCUQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <1507574441.3748.40.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20171009232314.545de76a@totoro>
 <1507583449.3748.46.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20171010003326.6409ae23@totoro>
 <1507585253.3748.57.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20171010021052.47d42db6@totoro>
 <1507662460.3420.18.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <CACE9dm-4SaL0sn_gnHy8Uj2pwVA2ztD1YcEj9Zy7TNEmx1Tb8Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CACE9dm_Ja8Y8vSCpbaZUnanZJ9msTm1x4dki2+F4g8040OokWw@mail.gmail.com>
 <1508358623.4510.35.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <CACE9dm92snkpP4vM_Jq0M10F9mHOFu5Zce8GB_HesmNDG9h=Rw@mail.gmail.com>
 <1508360841.4510.64.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
From: Dmitry Kasatkin <dmitry.kasatkin@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2017 13:36:57 +0300
Message-ID: <CACE9dm_FrANMHMYr+21TB183A2FzBQPtEhhua4dHCKPCUuQDXA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: RFC: Make it practical to ship EVM signatures
To: Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Mikhail Kurinnoi <viewizard@viewizard.com>,
        Matthew Garrett <mjg59@google.com>,
        linux-integrity <linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-integrity-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-integrity.vger.kernel.org>

On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 12:07 AM, Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> Hi Dmitry,
>
> On Wed, 2017-10-18 at 23:37 +0300, Dmitry Kasatkin wrote:
>> May be Mikhail could share GIT url to look somewhere.
>> To see latest bits.
>
> Please bottom post in the future.
>
> Summary:
> Mikhail's patches were posted earlier this year.  His patches defined
> a portable EVM signature, which was never written out to disk, but
> after being verified, was written out as an HMAC.  This was based on
> my understanding that the i_ino/uuid is required to prevent a cut &
> paste attack.
>
> In the recent discussions, Matthew wanted to know why the i_ino/uuid
> is required.  After going around and around discussing it, it turns
> out including security.ima is equivalent to including the i_ino/uuid.
>  The i_ino/uuid is only necessary to prevent a cut and paste attack,
> when security.ima is not included in the security.evm hmac/signature.
>
> We're at the point of making the portable EVM signature immutable. By
> immutable, we mean that it isn't re-written as an HMAC.  It is based
> on your ima-evm-utils support.

Do you mean to have unconditionally immutable?

>
> Mikhail, Matthew, did I leave anything out?
>
> Mimi
>



-- 
Thanks,
Dmitry