From: steven chen <chenste@linux.microsoft.com>
To: Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com>,
stefanb@linux.ibm.com, roberto.sassu@huaweicloud.com,
roberto.sassu@huawei.com, eric.snowberg@oracle.com,
ebiederm@xmission.com, paul@paul-moore.com, code@tyhicks.com,
bauermann@kolabnow.com, linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org,
kexec@lists.infradead.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: madvenka@linux.microsoft.com, nramas@linux.microsoft.com,
James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com, bhe@redhat.com,
vgoyal@redhat.com, dyoung@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 3/7] ima: kexec: skip IMA segment validation after kexec soft reboot
Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2025 13:06:37 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <a8814f0f-3613-4efd-afb2-655a5c0c9f38@linux.microsoft.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1883119129dbeeabad1f5239f042a7b920feef0f.camel@linux.ibm.com>
On 2/21/2025 7:41 AM, Mimi Zohar wrote:
> On Tue, 2025-02-18 at 14:54 -0800, steven chen wrote:
>> kexec_calculate_store_digests() calculates and stores the digest of the
>> segment at kexec_file_load syscall where the IMA segment is also
>> allocated. With this series, the IMA segment will be updated with the
>> measurement log at kexec execute stage when soft reboot is initiated.
>> Therefore, it may fail digest verification in verify_sha256_digest()
>> after kexec soft reboot into the new kernel. Therefore, the digest
>> calculation/verification of the IMA segment needs to be skipped.
>>
>> Skip the calculating and storing digest of the IMA segment in
>> kexec_calculate_store_digests() so that it is not added to the
>> 'purgatory_sha_regions'.
>>
>> Since verify_sha256_digest() only verifies 'purgatory_sha_regions',
>> no change is needed in verify_sha256_digest() in this context.
>>
>> With this change, the IMA segment is not included in the digest
>> calculation, storage, and verification.
> Basically you're saying because the hash verification will fail, don't include
> the IMA buffer. What's missing is the reason for not caring whether the IMA
> hash is included or not.
>
> I understand this is the best we can do without making some major kexec changes.
>
>> Signed-off-by: Tushar Sugandhi <tusharsu@linux.microsoft.com>
>> Signed-off-by: steven chen <chenste@linux.microsoft.com>
>> Reviewed-by: Stefan Berger <stefanb@linux.ibm.com>
> After updating the patch description,
>
> Reviewed-by: Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com>
>
>> ---
>> include/linux/kexec.h | 3 +++
>> kernel/kexec_file.c | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++++
>> security/integrity/ima/ima_kexec.c | 3 +++
>> 3 files changed, 28 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/include/linux/kexec.h b/include/linux/kexec.h
>> index 4dbf806bccef..bd554ced9fb2 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/kexec.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/kexec.h
>> @@ -362,6 +362,9 @@ struct kimage {
>>
>> phys_addr_t ima_buffer_addr;
>> size_t ima_buffer_size;
>> +
>> + unsigned long ima_segment_index;
>> + bool is_ima_segment_index_set;
>> #endif
>>
>> /* Core ELF header buffer */
>> diff --git a/kernel/kexec_file.c b/kernel/kexec_file.c
>> index 3eedb8c226ad..606132253c79 100644
>> --- a/kernel/kexec_file.c
>> +++ b/kernel/kexec_file.c
>> @@ -38,6 +38,21 @@ void set_kexec_sig_enforced(void)
>> }
>> #endif
>>
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_IMA_KEXEC
>> +static bool check_ima_segment_index(struct kimage *image, int i)
>> +{
>> + if (image->is_ima_segment_index_set && i == image->ima_segment_index)
>> + return true;
>> + else
>> + return false;
>> +}
>> +#else
>> +static bool check_ima_segment_index(struct kimage *image, int i)
>> +{
>> + return false;
>> +}
>> +#endif
>> +
>> static int kexec_calculate_store_digests(struct kimage *image);
>>
>> /* Maximum size in bytes for kernel/initrd files. */
>> @@ -764,6 +779,13 @@ static int kexec_calculate_store_digests(struct kimage
>> *image)
>> if (ksegment->kbuf == pi->purgatory_buf)
>> continue;
>>
>> + /*
>> + * Skip the segment if ima_segment_index is set and matches
>> + * the current index
>> + */
>> + if (check_ima_segment_index(image, i))
>> + continue;
>> +
>> ret = crypto_shash_update(desc, ksegment->kbuf,
>> ksegment->bufsz);
>> if (ret)
>> diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_kexec.c
>> b/security/integrity/ima/ima_kexec.c
>> index 89088f1fa989..704676fa6615 100644
>> --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_kexec.c
>> +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_kexec.c
>> @@ -160,6 +160,7 @@ void ima_add_kexec_buffer(struct kimage *image)
>> kbuf.buffer = kexec_buffer;
>> kbuf.bufsz = kexec_buffer_size;
>> kbuf.memsz = kexec_segment_size;
>> + image->is_ima_segment_index_set = false;
>> ret = kexec_add_buffer(&kbuf);
>> if (ret) {
>> pr_err("Error passing over kexec measurement buffer.\n");
>> @@ -170,6 +171,8 @@ void ima_add_kexec_buffer(struct kimage *image)
>> image->ima_buffer_addr = kbuf.mem;
>> image->ima_buffer_size = kexec_segment_size;
>> image->ima_buffer = kexec_buffer;
>> + image->ima_segment_index = image->nr_segments - 1;
>> + image->is_ima_segment_index_set = true;
>>
>> /*
>> * kexec owns kexec_buffer after kexec_add_buffer() is called
Thanks, Mimi. I will update in next version.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-02-21 21:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-02-18 22:54 [PATCH v8 0/7] ima: kexec: measure events between kexec load and execute steven chen
2025-02-18 22:54 ` [PATCH v8 1/7] ima: define and call ima_alloc_kexec_file_buf steven chen
2025-02-20 14:53 ` Mimi Zohar
2025-02-20 15:04 ` James Bottomley
2025-02-20 16:23 ` Mimi Zohar
2025-02-21 21:02 ` steven chen
2025-02-18 22:54 ` [PATCH v8 2/7] kexec: define functions to map and unmap segments steven chen
2025-02-20 0:53 ` kernel test robot
2025-02-20 17:22 ` Mimi Zohar
2025-02-21 21:05 ` steven chen
2025-02-24 6:14 ` Baoquan He
2025-02-24 23:05 ` steven chen
2025-02-25 0:18 ` Baoquan He
2025-02-25 18:35 ` steven chen
2025-02-26 0:39 ` Baoquan He
2025-02-27 15:41 ` Mimi Zohar
2025-02-28 5:03 ` Baoquan He
2025-03-04 16:15 ` Mimi Zohar
2025-02-18 22:54 ` [PATCH v8 3/7] ima: kexec: skip IMA segment validation after kexec soft reboot steven chen
2025-02-21 15:41 ` Mimi Zohar
2025-02-21 21:06 ` steven chen [this message]
2025-02-18 22:54 ` [PATCH v8 4/7] ima: kexec: define functions to copy IMA log at soft boot steven chen
2025-02-19 15:37 ` Stefan Berger
2025-02-19 19:21 ` steven chen
2025-02-21 19:07 ` Mimi Zohar
2025-02-21 19:41 ` Stefan Berger
2025-02-18 22:55 ` [PATCH v8 5/7] ima: kexec: move IMA log copy from kexec load to execute steven chen
2025-02-19 15:57 ` Stefan Berger
2025-02-19 19:23 ` steven chen
2025-02-20 1:35 ` kernel test robot
2025-02-18 22:55 ` [PATCH v8 6/7] ima: make the kexec extra memory configurable steven chen
2025-02-20 21:36 ` Mimi Zohar
2025-02-18 22:55 ` [PATCH v8 7/7] ima: measure kexec load and exec events as critical data steven chen
2025-02-19 16:23 ` Stefan Berger
2025-02-19 19:24 ` steven chen
2025-02-21 0:46 ` Mimi Zohar
2025-02-21 21:10 ` steven chen
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=a8814f0f-3613-4efd-afb2-655a5c0c9f38@linux.microsoft.com \
--to=chenste@linux.microsoft.com \
--cc=James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com \
--cc=bauermann@kolabnow.com \
--cc=bhe@redhat.com \
--cc=code@tyhicks.com \
--cc=dyoung@redhat.com \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=eric.snowberg@oracle.com \
--cc=kexec@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=madvenka@linux.microsoft.com \
--cc=nramas@linux.microsoft.com \
--cc=paul@paul-moore.com \
--cc=roberto.sassu@huawei.com \
--cc=roberto.sassu@huaweicloud.com \
--cc=stefanb@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=vgoyal@redhat.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