From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com (Mimi Zohar) Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2017 13:52:16 -0400 Subject: [PATCH 03/27] Enforce module signatures if the kernel is locked down In-Reply-To: <3565.1509382834@warthog.procyon.org.uk> References: <1509130095.3716.13.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <150842463163.7923.11081723749106843698.stgit@warthog.procyon.org.uk> <150842465546.7923.6762214527898273559.stgit@warthog.procyon.org.uk> <3565.1509382834@warthog.procyon.org.uk> Message-ID: <1509385936.3583.170.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com> To: linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-security-module.vger.kernel.org [Corrected Matthew Garrett's email address. ?Cc'ed Bruno Meneguele] On Mon, 2017-10-30 at 17:00 +0000, David Howells wrote: > Mimi Zohar wrote: > > > This kernel_is_locked_down() check is being called for both the > > original and new module_load syscalls. ?We need to be able > > differentiate them. ?This is fine for the original syscall, but for > > the new syscall we would need an additional IMA check - > > !is_ima_appraise_enabled(). > > IMA can only be used with finit_module()? Yes, without the file descriptor, IMA-appraisal can't access the xattrs.? You should really look at Bruno's patches, which are in my next branch: 8168913c50d5 "ima: check signature enforcement against cmdline param instead of CONFIG" 404090509894 module: export module signature enforcement status Can we get an Ack on the module one? Mimi -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-security-module" in the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html