public inbox for linux-man@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: jlee@suse.com
To: Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	"Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>,
	Matthew Garrett <mjg59@google.com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>,
	James Morris <jmorris@namei.org>,
	Alan Cox <gnomes@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Justin Forbes <jforbes@redhat.com>,
	linux-man <linux-man@vger.kernel.org>,
	LSM List <linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux API <linux-api@vger.kernel.org>,
	Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
	linux-efi <linux-efi@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: An actual suggestion (Re: [GIT PULL] Kernel lockdown for secure boot)
Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2018 00:11:24 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180405161124.y5jfe76lfqog7iiv@linux-rasp2> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1522936869.16421.63.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com>

Hi Mimi,

On Thu, Apr 05, 2018 at 10:01:09AM -0400, Mimi Zohar wrote:
> On Thu, 2018-04-05 at 10:16 +0800, joeyli wrote:
> > Hi David, 
> > 
> > On Wed, Apr 04, 2018 at 05:17:24PM +0100, David Howells wrote:
> > > Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Since this thread has devolved horribly, I'm going to propose a solution.
> > > > 
> > > > 1. Split the "lockdown" state into three levels:  (please don't
> > > > bikeshed about the names right now.)
> > > > 
> > > > LOCKDOWN_NONE: normal behavior
> > > > 
> > > > LOCKDOWN_PROTECT_INTEGREITY: kernel tries to keep root from writing to
> > > > kernel memory
> > > > 
> > > > LOCKDOWN_PROTECT_INTEGRITY_AND_SECRECY: kernel tries to keep root from
> > > > reading or writing kernel memory.
> > > 
> > > In theory, it's good idea, but in practice it's not as easy to implement as I
> > > think you think.
> > > 
> > > Let me list here the things that currently get restricted by lockdown:
> > > 
> > [...snip]
> > >  (5) Kexec.
> > >
> > 
> > About IMA with kernel module signing and kexec(not on x86_64 yet)...
> 
> Only carrying the measurement list across kexec is architecture
> specific, but everything else should work.  
> 
> > Because IMA can be used to verify the integrity of kernel module or even
> > the image for kexec. I think that the
> > IMA_KEYRINGS_PERMIT_SIGNED_BY_BUILTIN_OR_SECONDARY must be enabled at runtime
> > when kernel is locked-down.
> 
> I think we need to understand the problem a bit better.  Is the
> problem that you're using the secondary keyring and loading the UEFI
> keys onto the secondary keyring?
>

Sorry for my mistake. I want to write INTEGRITY_TRUSTED_KEYRING in
above but not IMA_KEYRINGS_PERMIT_SIGNED_BY_BUILTIN_OR_SECONDARY.

My brain is not clear when writing the mail.
 
> > Because the root can enroll master key to keyring then IMA trusts the ima key
> > derived from master key. It causes that the arbitrary signed module can be loaded
> > when the root compromised.
> 
> With only the builtin keyring, only keys signed by a builtin key can
> be added to the IMA keyring.
> 

Thanks for your description. I saw that the IMA_LOAD_X509 already depends
on IMA_TRUSTED_KEYRING (INTEGRITY_TRUSTED_KEYRING). Please ignore my concern.

Thanks a lot!
Joey Lee

  reply	other threads:[~2018-04-05 16:11 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-04-04 14:49 An actual suggestion (Re: [GIT PULL] Kernel lockdown for secure boot) Andy Lutomirski
2018-04-04 16:17 ` David Howells
2018-04-04 16:23   ` Jann Horn
2018-04-04 22:19     ` David Howells
2018-04-05  1:48       ` joeyli
2018-04-04 16:36   ` Andy Lutomirski
2018-04-04 23:25   ` James Morris
2018-04-05  0:22     ` Matthew Garrett
2018-04-05  2:16   ` joeyli
2018-04-05 14:01     ` Mimi Zohar
2018-04-05 16:11       ` jlee [this message]
2018-04-05  1:45 ` joeyli

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=20180405161124.y5jfe76lfqog7iiv@linux-rasp2 \
    --to=jlee@suse.com \
    --cc=ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org \
    --cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
    --cc=gnomes@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=jforbes@redhat.com \
    --cc=jmorris@namei.org \
    --cc=keescook@chromium.org \
    --cc=linux-api@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-efi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-man@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=luto@kernel.org \
    --cc=mjg59@google.com \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=tytso@mit.edu \
    --cc=zohar@linux.vnet.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