public inbox for linux-s390@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: GONG Ruiqi <gongruiqi1@huawei.com>
To: Nayna Jain <nayna@linux.ibm.com>,
	Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com>,
	Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@huawei.com>,
	Dmitry Kasatkin <dmitry.kasatkin@gmail.com>,
	Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@kernel.org>,
	Madhavan Srinivasan <maddy@linux.ibm.com>,
	Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
	Heiko Carstens <hca@linux.ibm.com>,
	Vasily Gorbik <gor@linux.ibm.com>,
	Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: Eric Snowberg <eric.snowberg@oracle.com>,
	Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>,
	Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>,
	Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>,
	Sven Schnelle <svens@linux.ibm.com>,
	"Lee, Chun-Yi" <jlee@suse.com>, <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>,
	<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-s390@vger.kernel.org>,
	<linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org>, <keyrings@vger.kernel.org>,
	Lu Jialin <lujialin4@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] integrity: Extract secure boot enquiry function out of IMA
Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2025 20:29:07 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <362b3e8a-0949-42d1-a1d0-90bd12d86b09@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <e8aa7f94-3e52-488d-a858-564d3d1edd4b@linux.ibm.com>


On 7/8/2025 4:35 AM, Nayna Jain wrote:
> 
> On 7/2/25 10:07 PM, GONG Ruiqi wrote:
>> 
>> ...
>>
>> "We encountered a boot failure issue in an in-house testing, where the
>> kernel refused to load its modules since it couldn't verify their
>> signature. The root cause turned out to be the early return of
>> load_uefi_certs(), where arch_ima_get_secureboot() returned false
>> unconditionally due to CONFIG_IMA_SECURE_AND_OR_TRUSTED_BOOT=n, even
>> though the secure boot was enabled.
> Thanks for sharing additional details.
> 
> From x86 Kconfig:
> 
> /For config x86:
> 
>     imply IMA_SECURE_AND_OR_TRUSTED_BOOT    if EFI
> /
> And IMA_SECURE_AND_OR_TRUSTED_BOOT is dependent on IMA_ARCH_POLICY .
> 
> And from Linux Kernel Kbuild documentation( https://docs.kernel.org/
> kbuild/kconfig-language.html) :
> 
> /weak reverse dependencies: “imply” <symbol> [“if” <expr>]
> 
> This is similar to “select” as it enforces a lower limit on another
> symbol except that the “implied” symbol’s value may still be set to n
> from a direct dependency or with a visible prompt.
> 
> /Following the example from the documentation, if  it is EFI enabled and
> IMA_ARCH_POLICY is set to y then this config should be default enabled.
> 
> If it is EFI enabled and IMA_ARCH_POLICY is set to N, then the setting
> for IMA_SECURE_AND_OR_TRUSTED_BOOT should be prompted during the build.
> The default setting for prompt is N. So, the person doing the build
> should actually select Y to enable IMA_ARCH_POLICY.
> 
> Wondering what is the scenario for you? Unless you have IMA_ARCH_POLICY
> set to N, this config should have been ideally enabled. If you have
> explicitly set it to N, am curious any specific reason for that.

Hi Nayna. Sorry for the late reply. Super busy these days...

Yes, IMA_ARCH_POLICY was not set. The testing was conducted on
openEuler[1], a Linux distro mainly for arm64 & x86, and the kernel was
compiled based on its own openeuler_defconfig[2], which set
IMA_ARCH_POLICY to N.

-Ruiqi

[1]: https://www.openeuler.org/en/
[2]:
https://gitee.com/openeuler/kernel/blob/OLK-6.6/arch/arm64/configs/openeuler_defconfig


> 
> Thanks & Regards,
> 
>    - Nayna
>>
>> ...


  reply	other threads:[~2025-07-17 12:29 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-06-28  6:32 [PATCH v2] integrity: Extract secure boot enquiry function out of IMA GONG Ruiqi
2025-06-30  3:48 ` kernel test robot
2025-07-03  1:38 ` Mimi Zohar
2025-07-03  2:07   ` GONG Ruiqi
2025-07-03  3:35     ` Mimi Zohar
2025-07-03  5:19       ` GONG Ruiqi
2025-07-07 20:35     ` Nayna Jain
2025-07-17 12:29       ` GONG Ruiqi [this message]
2025-07-25 18:29         ` Nayna Jain
2025-07-28 12:17           ` GONG Ruiqi
2025-08-01 14:34             ` Nayna Jain

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=362b3e8a-0949-42d1-a1d0-90bd12d86b09@huawei.com \
    --to=gongruiqi1@huawei.com \
    --cc=agordeev@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=borntraeger@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu \
    --cc=dmitry.kasatkin@gmail.com \
    --cc=eric.snowberg@oracle.com \
    --cc=gor@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=hca@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=jarkko@kernel.org \
    --cc=jlee@suse.com \
    --cc=keyrings@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=lujialin4@huawei.com \
    --cc=maddy@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
    --cc=nayna@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=npiggin@gmail.com \
    --cc=roberto.sassu@huawei.com \
    --cc=svens@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