From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER,INCLUDES_PATCH, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_2 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 390CBC433DB for ; Mon, 8 Feb 2021 20:49:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CCA2C64DED for ; Mon, 8 Feb 2021 20:49:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S234488AbhBHUtR (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Feb 2021 15:49:17 -0500 Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.156.1]:37186 "EHLO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S233512AbhBHUqi (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Feb 2021 15:46:38 -0500 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098410.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 118KWXgA050385; Mon, 8 Feb 2021 15:45:37 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ibm.com; h=message-id : subject : from : to : cc : date : in-reply-to : references : content-type : mime-version : content-transfer-encoding; s=pp1; bh=USpxUQd0VGEWjHopywgNAUX7w1A/s/fmhQc03dwNPds=; b=OIEDAoMsQyk0NbOF7l7V4lhSPyQXlN8cij9YNPHTX2k0FNwGGetWZp42hgL7aZvITJyA WTpVp+xoBhUeE8XaI/Df+6ngjv+FI/JdaFYFFPUjQId46JFF1aBhKOPBJZ686u6yM0zy GUDMcJMejXpNbJyqV8YB1g6iwBc3BM9Vy6eIlwiaWZFDR9J99P6P7WTl6ivHLjXPj6l2 KdsGDEGdW2waGODzVSs5ylroIFFXfn4lX4Tptp8GfYYg93UyjpjRQIHHziYkZAX6nOsU /Th5IrCvE8me76yfEXTTp+MKYkpc8Ubhya3iK7oZrwj/MgZ6WGqN9J5uErj4LrZ7FHXw Rw== Received: from pps.reinject (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 36kbpw1d73-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Mon, 08 Feb 2021 15:45:37 -0500 Received: from m0098410.ppops.net (m0098410.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by pps.reinject (8.16.0.36/8.16.0.36) with SMTP id 118KWcVO050839; Mon, 8 Feb 2021 15:45:36 -0500 Received: from ppma03ams.nl.ibm.com (62.31.33a9.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [169.51.49.98]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 36kbpw1d6e-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Mon, 08 Feb 2021 15:45:36 -0500 Received: from pps.filterd (ppma03ams.nl.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma03ams.nl.ibm.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 118K8gOT011901; Mon, 8 Feb 2021 20:45:34 GMT Received: from b06cxnps4075.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06relay12.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.109.197]) by ppma03ams.nl.ibm.com with ESMTP id 36hqda26b6-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Mon, 08 Feb 2021 20:45:34 +0000 Received: from d06av24.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (mk.ibm.com [9.149.105.60]) by b06cxnps4075.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 118KjVg147251940 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 8 Feb 2021 20:45:31 GMT Received: from d06av24.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id C485B4203F; Mon, 8 Feb 2021 20:45:31 +0000 (GMT) Received: from d06av24.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6712E42041; Mon, 8 Feb 2021 20:45:28 +0000 (GMT) Received: from li-f45666cc-3089-11b2-a85c-c57d1a57929f.ibm.com (unknown [9.160.48.239]) by d06av24.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Mon, 8 Feb 2021 20:45:28 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: <059e77ffa861680ccac7fd94251fedc7cffe7a7e.camel@linux.ibm.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] IMA: add policy condition to measure duplicate critical data From: Mimi Zohar To: Tushar Sugandhi , stephen.smalley.work@gmail.com, casey@schaufler-ca.com, agk@redhat.com, snitzer@redhat.com, gmazyland@gmail.com, paul@paul-moore.com Cc: tyhicks@linux.microsoft.com, sashal@kernel.org, jmorris@namei.org, nramas@linux.microsoft.com, linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org, selinux@vger.kernel.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dm-devel@redhat.com Date: Mon, 08 Feb 2021 15:45:27 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20210130004519.25106-2-tusharsu@linux.microsoft.com> References: <20210130004519.25106-1-tusharsu@linux.microsoft.com> <20210130004519.25106-2-tusharsu@linux.microsoft.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-15" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.28.5 (3.28.5-14.el8) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.369,18.0.737 definitions=2021-02-08_13:2021-02-08,2021-02-08 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 suspectscore=0 mlxscore=0 adultscore=0 phishscore=0 clxscore=1015 mlxlogscore=999 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 malwarescore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 priorityscore=1501 impostorscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2009150000 definitions=main-2102080119 Precedence: bulk List-ID: Hi Tushar, On Fri, 2021-01-29 at 16:45 -0800, Tushar Sugandhi wrote: > IMA needs to support duplicate measurements of integrity > critical data to accurately determine the current state of that data > on the system. Further, since measurement of duplicate data is not > required for all the use cases, it needs to be policy driven. > > Define "allow_dup", a new IMA policy condition, for the IMA func > CRITICAL_DATA to allow duplicate buffer measurement of integrity > critical data. > > Limit the ability to measure duplicate buffer data when action is > "measure" and func is CRITICAL_DATA. Why?! > > Signed-off-by: Tushar Sugandhi > --- > > diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c b/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c > index 9b45d064a87d..b89eb768dd05 100644 > --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c > +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c > @@ -35,6 +35,7 @@ > #define IMA_FSNAME 0x0200 > #define IMA_KEYRINGS 0x0400 > #define IMA_LABEL 0x0800 > +#define IMA_ALLOW_DUP 0x1000 > > #define UNKNOWN 0 > #define MEASURE 0x0001 /* same as IMA_MEASURE */ > @@ -87,6 +88,7 @@ struct ima_rule_entry { > char *fsname; > struct ima_rule_opt_list *keyrings; /* Measure keys added to these keyrings */ > struct ima_rule_opt_list *label; /* Measure data grouped under this label */ Defining a new boolean entry shouldn't be necessary. The other boolean values are just stored in "flags". > struct ima_template_desc *template; > }; thanks, Mimi