From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com [148.163.158.5]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B8BB5311C03; Fri, 12 Sep 2025 16:38:25 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=148.163.158.5 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1757695107; cv=none; b=XATH0OS2huGetySgg8tFARWUsp3XUxf1putWzw2nLIMfm3MHENrvYLbTi8A1Gly9j9V7DpvoUxvHD8Oq5omxBFY4lXOeUFk7b2EE5eRyPAgpMLL+qlA9E+5WITtnKLC9XFfWj1hQr9VFesMKj7BMLDdFV+UXtLDvoZvwVubCG3E= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1757695107; c=relaxed/simple; bh=2RaPbc9jVOhVYH7V2C0vnTwGjblLI5tvoUlhHEkUM3A=; h=Message-ID:Subject:From:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Content-Type: Date:MIME-Version; b=tKAuHHzXHgwiZnIvyrGxFG8h2AanuQX3kBDT3lH+gIoxhrZ8JS2/Qq8EBJ1O4tQkc+Hx/tUynDCorcSx7dk3PlRTfJ8KV3GesEiMhSekjDggZ2+AA6Wkhu9DuBjXzvJo+YJ2/+ADDACcvGE5kgS7XIT57VvjJRM11gHC/EOToEM= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.ibm.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.ibm.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=ibm.com header.i=@ibm.com header.b=qa8AjvoY; arc=none smtp.client-ip=148.163.158.5 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.ibm.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.ibm.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=ibm.com header.i=@ibm.com header.b="qa8AjvoY" Received: from pps.filterd (m0360072.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.18.1.2/8.18.1.2) with ESMTP id 58C9LufK028539; Fri, 12 Sep 2025 16:37:22 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ibm.com; h=cc :content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to; s=pp1; bh=DI0p5X VIyWC/Uc+yOWrpUqOI9NbAAOOCwcn10yjBar8=; b=qa8AjvoYRk23gmEWuY8FwH Z67y1w7CokEz66O5EbQyL0NcwMYLFkhzqqPKeXkXuswubOI9e9R2N99FCZeAw7xY LUJWVFY6DDA8llzrGlwPbSQlTqS8iL5SHZ1ncveGNDNERFP0Qgkguz56iYiHLbvt jFu65P4lDQXV4RdC+UDrVcYlF5EV2lPCYn9pKBcetH4N/n0V08eCiSMKESANkUBw 68WMR0rJPV/aQYs0BRfiyLe+/xDwQR+bdieXqYIvLcEIdYvIc/t8n7U8ZUz9K/Da fEnzr5JKaw12VjwpsulLYB84IrgASA699fId1sClUUNVVtMx0EyKNdSAwmrx7X/g == Received: from pps.reinject (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 490ukf0qhp-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 12 Sep 2025 16:37:21 +0000 (GMT) Received: from m0360072.ppops.net (m0360072.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by pps.reinject (8.18.1.12/8.18.0.8) with ESMTP id 58CGbLGi018156; Fri, 12 Sep 2025 16:37:21 GMT Received: from ppma21.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com (5b.69.3da9.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [169.61.105.91]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 490ukf0qhh-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 12 Sep 2025 16:37:21 +0000 (GMT) Received: from pps.filterd (ppma21.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma21.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com (8.18.1.2/8.18.1.2) with ESMTP id 58CDelSB007912; Fri, 12 Sep 2025 16:37:20 GMT Received: from smtprelay04.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com ([172.16.1.71]) by ppma21.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 49109q3vfv-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 12 Sep 2025 16:37:20 +0000 Received: from smtpav03.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (smtpav03.dal12v.mail.ibm.com [10.241.53.102]) by smtprelay04.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 58CGbJ1S51249614 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 12 Sep 2025 16:37:20 GMT Received: from smtpav03.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD82D5805A; Fri, 12 Sep 2025 16:37:19 +0000 (GMT) Received: from smtpav03.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB3B558056; Fri, 12 Sep 2025 16:37:18 +0000 (GMT) Received: from li-43857255-d5e6-4659-90f1-fc5cee4750ad.ibm.com (unknown [9.61.159.184]) by smtpav03.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Fri, 12 Sep 2025 16:37:18 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 31/34] ima,evm: move initcalls to the LSM framework From: Mimi Zohar To: Paul Moore Cc: Roberto Sassu , linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org, selinux@vger.kernel.org, John Johansen , Fan Wu , =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Micka=EBl_Sala=FCn?= , =?ISO-8859-1?Q?G=FCnther?= Noack , Kees Cook , Micah Morton , Casey Schaufler , Tetsuo Handa , Nicolas Bouchinet , Xiu Jianfeng In-Reply-To: References: <20250814225159.275901-36-paul@paul-moore.com> <20250814225159.275901-67-paul@paul-moore.com> <9f1dd6d30193c82ff36b5665eadc1aec73736017.camel@linux.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2025 12:37:18 -0400 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Evolution 3.54.3 (3.54.3-1.fc41) X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details-Enc: AW1haW4tMjUwOTA2MDE5NSBTYWx0ZWRfX0IPeRwJI3Adi qjW66a4Pvc+8GFw75a2yOYGgWzU3ex911mTiCbMtlV3Fsb4wkZbu7sEfz9BZuLCJPcSya4Amx4d VdZqJ/tCu+pd5HSeFFb1cZq3TNMwMaBi+sYMvvPZ9zXA1mMi7y7NMB/S8oi+9xdwlfAqlYUFCO4 sMaRea9nLXr0c3TdSKHbSxUOP88rkw6WIha9atHr2pewwholZm5ujJ3BhotwFY3WpOU/CWY6RR4 oPahVjUNrjOnp1eq5yW04qNwbja2JuhYWnsRil8K5+kQgEuUy3iHj7k187GWUm7Y71TOauO1Bo1 zHSh7r7e3qQ5tt9ak32AKiY7S9FJizzsMEv+Tg7J1f7qGwqAMTkcLaeKq3yAK9iEhMm1piGvwXB ELhuWfKx X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: Yxh_EHnslaCun6acJXqbcBg6NjEz5PrK X-Proofpoint-GUID: vvOdsqKARsuCKDEWjnHCxq114P4DZJWX X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.4 cv=StCQ6OO0 c=1 sm=1 tr=0 ts=68c44c42 cx=c_pps a=GFwsV6G8L6GxiO2Y/PsHdQ==:117 a=GFwsV6G8L6GxiO2Y/PsHdQ==:17 a=IkcTkHD0fZMA:10 a=yJojWOMRYYMA:10 a=VnNF1IyMAAAA:8 a=CT4C0UVHrSCr1UfN2mgA:9 a=QEXdDO2ut3YA:10 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.293,Aquarius:18.0.1117,Hydra:6.1.9,FMLib:17.12.80.40 definitions=2025-09-12_06,2025-09-12_01,2025-03-28_01 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 spamscore=0 malwarescore=0 bulkscore=0 clxscore=1015 adultscore=0 suspectscore=0 priorityscore=1501 impostorscore=0 phishscore=0 classifier=typeunknown authscore=0 authtc= authcc= route=outbound adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.19.0-2507300000 definitions=main-2509060195 On Thu, 2025-09-11 at 15:30 -0400, Paul Moore wrote: > On Mon, Sep 8, 2025 at 6:34=E2=80=AFPM Mimi Zohar w= rote: > > On Sun, 2025-09-07 at 21:05 -0400, Paul Moore wrote: > > > > The "unrelated to IMA/EVM" wording misses the point. An exception = was made to > > > > load the pre-boot keys onto the .platform keyring in order for IMA/= EVM to verify > > > > the kexec kernel image appended signature. This exception was subs= equently > > > > extended to verifying the pesigned kexec kernel image signature. (= Other > > > > subsystems are abusing the keys on the .platform keyring to verify = other > > > > signatures.) > > > >=20 > > > > Instead of saying "unrelated to IMA/EVM", how about saying somethin= g along the > > > > lines of "IMA has a dependency on the platform and machine keyrings= , but this > > > > dependency isn't limited to IMA/EVM." > > > >=20 > > > > Paul, this patch set doesn't apply to cleanly to Linus's tree. Wha= t is the base > > > > commit? > > >=20 > > > It would have been based on the lsm/dev branch since the LSM tree is > > > the target, however, given the scope of the patchset and the fact tha= t > > > it has been several weeks since it was originally posted, I wouldn't > > > be surprised it if needs some fuzzing when applied on top of lsm/dev > > > too. > >=20 > > Thanks, Paul. I was able to apply the patches and run some regression = tests. >=20 > Mimi, I know you already tagged Roberto's patch with a 'Reviewed-by' > tag, but I wanted to follow up and see if you were comfortable > converting that into an ACK, or if you wanted more time to review > Roberto's patch? No wrong answers, just trying to understand where > you are at with this patch. Please don't convert the Reviewed-by tag quite yet to an Ack. I'd really l= ike to review the entire patch set and do some additional testing. thanks, Mimi