From: Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@huaweicloud.com>
To: Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com>,
dmitry.kasatkin@gmail.com, jmorris@namei.org, serge@hallyn.com
Cc: linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org,
linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stefanb@linux.ibm.com,
viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] ima: Introduce MMAP_CHECK_REQPROT hook
Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2023 11:37:17 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <08ad72c3ddebb829acd66697c14e9bb5fadc6f97.camel@huaweicloud.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <89a7cc7efe1545e18c9af6c3ec53468d6f528a7a.camel@linux.ibm.com>
On Sun, 2023-01-29 at 09:52 -0500, Mimi Zohar wrote:
> On Thu, 2023-01-26 at 17:38 +0100, Roberto Sassu wrote:
> > From: Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@huawei.com>
> >
> > Commit 98de59bfe4b2f ("take calculation of final prot in
> > security_mmap_file() into a helper") caused ima_file_mmap() to receive the
> > protections requested by the application and not those applied by the
> > kernel.
> >
> > After restoring the original MMAP_CHECK behavior with a patch, existing
> > systems might be broken due to not being ready to handle new entries
> > (previously missing) in the IMA measurement list.
>
> Is this a broken system or a broken attestation server? The
> attestation server might not be able to handle the additional
> measurements, but the system, itself, is not broken.
Ok, wasn't clear. I meant attestation server. The system itself is not
broken.
> "with a patch" is unnecessary.
Ok.
> > Restore the original correct MMAP_CHECK behavior instead of keeping the
>
> ^ add missing comma after "behavior"
>
> > current buggy one and introducing a new hook with the correct behavior. The
> > second option
>
> ^ The second option -> Otherwise,
>
> > would have had the risk of IMA users not noticing the problem
> > at all, as they would actively have to update the IMA policy, to switch to
> > the correct behavior.
> >
> > Also, introduce the new MMAP_CHECK_REQPROT hook to keep the current
> > behavior, so that IMA users could easily fix a broken system, although this
> > approach is discouraged due to potentially missing measurements.
>
> Again, is this a broken system or a broken attestation server?
>
> > Signed-off-by: Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@huawei.com>
>
> Otherwise, the patch looks good.
Ok, will make the changes.
Thanks
Roberto
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-01-30 10:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-01-26 16:38 [PATCH v3 1/2] ima: Align ima_file_mmap() parameters with mmap_file LSM hook Roberto Sassu
2023-01-26 16:38 ` [PATCH v3 2/2] ima: Introduce MMAP_CHECK_REQPROT hook Roberto Sassu
2023-01-29 14:52 ` Mimi Zohar
2023-01-30 10:37 ` Roberto Sassu [this message]
2023-01-26 16:38 ` [PATCH ima-evm-utils] Add tests for MMAP_CHECK and MMAP_CHECK_REQPROT hooks Roberto Sassu
2023-01-26 22:25 ` Stefan Berger
2023-01-27 7:57 ` Roberto Sassu
2023-01-26 19:37 ` [PATCH v3 1/2] ima: Align ima_file_mmap() parameters with mmap_file LSM hook Stefan Berger
2023-01-27 7:55 ` Roberto Sassu
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=08ad72c3ddebb829acd66697c14e9bb5fadc6f97.camel@huaweicloud.com \
--to=roberto.sassu@huaweicloud.com \
--cc=dmitry.kasatkin@gmail.com \
--cc=jmorris@namei.org \
--cc=linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=roberto.sassu@huawei.com \
--cc=serge@hallyn.com \
--cc=stefanb@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).