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=-6.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=unavailable 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 3E13AC48BD6 for ; Wed, 26 Jun 2019 23:09:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0AD0521738 for ; Wed, 26 Jun 2019 23:09:44 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=chromium.org header.i=@chromium.org header.b="bm9fRz0o" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726373AbfFZXJn (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 Jun 2019 19:09:43 -0400 Received: from mail-pg1-f193.google.com ([209.85.215.193]:37775 "EHLO mail-pg1-f193.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726399AbfFZXJn (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 Jun 2019 19:09:43 -0400 Received: by mail-pg1-f193.google.com with SMTP id 25so80404pgy.4 for ; Wed, 26 Jun 2019 16:09:42 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=chromium.org; s=google; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=WBG4T9mScwX8lTA12fbf+nutRScDpun4YIbaRNhVoaE=; b=bm9fRz0o8Lr3RoR3JARauHzGmzv0mxUcLNKrzEpxLhhNFN064B73SLp3Hss3NPiBh4 41JsNfhYEoqcuVhXBoSQWL5UA2qeWs5P4oJsfTZ+sI/PvobRxbv5b3258F7+CFTHvPpa nj9pgz7tKa2pVkt76JAnKKslJcXEk9U4+nF6A= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=WBG4T9mScwX8lTA12fbf+nutRScDpun4YIbaRNhVoaE=; b=pLLOEBuz/XWrs8uUKkx5b8jpZO4ZUiNEnJlX8/9Y6xd1pcCSemnhj2TVTO2XFSHOav EUsVTJDrfaJTFTMk3FzJVyvklOFeLElB0C1zuP/KNjQX9he7+qqMbwAvhntIDMjmpO9L EUWsAZwEOQGAA6Ay8pOc+jIIBLdxHSbNVwE0t2McRBg9pGSK3ddrNGIoZOB2osx9lVpF HtF9DUEjcfK5qVByUoQpTldFp4UWp7PxXXHvMiwx2edUsdJFpUaS97TvxMkZQieByj+d 9nyYB9D+efATxqtguA01F99pkxVyQpbi9zUlj8LfzVlCiswqX00W5MrV5EIxNNbgwGij nBnw== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVYnREDoBqiHzy6Obw0RyhjkqbMrLDsrrc6J5FZVcDwqBqwhvsE v57scnVTyxHMlTN3Q3P2pIAVwA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzAxRwG8rR0InFGVv5fXPotm2YatnJWnrjYFx2ZksGPnkFwwa/NXeJmEji2JxDP9/5r/ebYfA== X-Received: by 2002:a63:2985:: with SMTP id p127mr428431pgp.400.1561590582059; Wed, 26 Jun 2019 16:09:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from www.outflux.net (smtp.outflux.net. [198.145.64.163]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id l68sm3085454pjb.8.2019.06.26.16.09.41 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Wed, 26 Jun 2019 16:09:41 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2019 16:09:40 -0700 From: Kees Cook To: Casey Schaufler Cc: casey.schaufler@intel.com, jmorris@namei.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, selinux@vger.kernel.org, john.johansen@canonical.com, penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp, paul@paul-moore.com, sds@tycho.nsa.gov Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 14/23] IMA: Change internal interfaces to use lsmblobs Message-ID: <201906261609.56B383544A@keescook> References: <20190626192234.11725-1-casey@schaufler-ca.com> <20190626192234.11725-15-casey@schaufler-ca.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190626192234.11725-15-casey@schaufler-ca.com> Sender: owner-linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 12:22:25PM -0700, Casey Schaufler wrote: > The IMA interfaces ima_get_action() and ima_match_policy() > call LSM functions that use lsmblobs. Change the IMA functions > to pass the lsmblob to be compatible with the LSM functions. > > Signed-off-by: Casey Schaufler Reviewed-by: Kees Cook -Kees > --- > security/integrity/ima/ima.h | 10 ++++++---- > security/integrity/ima/ima_api.c | 9 +++++---- > security/integrity/ima/ima_appraise.c | 4 +--- > security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c | 27 +++++++++++---------------- > security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c | 12 ++++++------ > 5 files changed, 29 insertions(+), 33 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima.h b/security/integrity/ima/ima.h > index 5a337239d9e4..73b3b15dec5c 100644 > --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima.h > +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima.h > @@ -192,8 +192,9 @@ enum ima_hooks { > }; > > /* LIM API function definitions */ > -int ima_get_action(struct inode *inode, const struct cred *cred, u32 secid, > - int mask, enum ima_hooks func, int *pcr); > +int ima_get_action(struct inode *inode, const struct cred *cred, > + struct lsmblob *blob, int mask, enum ima_hooks func, > + int *pcr); > int ima_must_measure(struct inode *inode, int mask, enum ima_hooks func); > int ima_collect_measurement(struct integrity_iint_cache *iint, > struct file *file, void *buf, loff_t size, > @@ -213,8 +214,9 @@ void ima_free_template_entry(struct ima_template_entry *entry); > const char *ima_d_path(const struct path *path, char **pathbuf, char *filename); > > /* IMA policy related functions */ > -int ima_match_policy(struct inode *inode, const struct cred *cred, u32 secid, > - enum ima_hooks func, int mask, int flags, int *pcr); > +int ima_match_policy(struct inode *inode, const struct cred *cred, > + struct lsmblob *blob, enum ima_hooks func, int mask, > + int flags, int *pcr); > void ima_init_policy(void); > void ima_update_policy(void); > void ima_update_policy_flag(void); > diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_api.c b/security/integrity/ima/ima_api.c > index c7505fb122d4..94b2a4840d81 100644 > --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_api.c > +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_api.c > @@ -159,7 +159,7 @@ void ima_add_violation(struct file *file, const unsigned char *filename, > * ima_get_action - appraise & measure decision based on policy. > * @inode: pointer to inode to measure > * @cred: pointer to credentials structure to validate > - * @secid: secid of the task being validated > + * @blob: LSM data of the task being validated > * @mask: contains the permission mask (MAY_READ, MAY_WRITE, MAY_EXEC, > * MAY_APPEND) > * @func: caller identifier > @@ -175,14 +175,15 @@ void ima_add_violation(struct file *file, const unsigned char *filename, > * Returns IMA_MEASURE, IMA_APPRAISE mask. > * > */ > -int ima_get_action(struct inode *inode, const struct cred *cred, u32 secid, > - int mask, enum ima_hooks func, int *pcr) > +int ima_get_action(struct inode *inode, const struct cred *cred, > + struct lsmblob *blob, int mask, enum ima_hooks func, > + int *pcr) > { > int flags = IMA_MEASURE | IMA_AUDIT | IMA_APPRAISE | IMA_HASH; > > flags &= ima_policy_flag; > > - return ima_match_policy(inode, cred, secid, func, mask, flags, pcr); > + return ima_match_policy(inode, cred, blob, func, mask, flags, pcr); > } > > /* > diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_appraise.c b/security/integrity/ima/ima_appraise.c > index 85c7692fc4a3..3ff7aae81829 100644 > --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_appraise.c > +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_appraise.c > @@ -50,15 +50,13 @@ bool is_ima_appraise_enabled(void) > */ > int ima_must_appraise(struct inode *inode, int mask, enum ima_hooks func) > { > - u32 secid; > struct lsmblob blob; > > if (!ima_appraise) > return 0; > > security_task_getsecid(current, &blob); > - lsmblob_secid(&blob, &secid); > - return ima_match_policy(inode, current_cred(), secid, func, mask, > + return ima_match_policy(inode, current_cred(), &blob, func, mask, > IMA_APPRAISE | IMA_HASH, NULL); > } > > diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c b/security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c > index 1afb75a893af..0588dd9a88db 100644 > --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c > +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c > @@ -169,8 +169,8 @@ void ima_file_free(struct file *file) > } > > static int process_measurement(struct file *file, const struct cred *cred, > - u32 secid, char *buf, loff_t size, int mask, > - enum ima_hooks func) > + struct lsmblob *blob, char *buf, loff_t size, > + int mask, enum ima_hooks func) > { > struct inode *inode = file_inode(file); > struct integrity_iint_cache *iint = NULL; > @@ -192,7 +192,7 @@ static int process_measurement(struct file *file, const struct cred *cred, > * bitmask based on the appraise/audit/measurement policy. > * Included is the appraise submask. > */ > - action = ima_get_action(inode, cred, secid, mask, func, &pcr); > + action = ima_get_action(inode, cred, blob, mask, func, &pcr); > violation_check = ((func == FILE_CHECK || func == MMAP_CHECK) && > (ima_policy_flag & IMA_MEASURE)); > if (!action && !violation_check) > @@ -339,8 +339,7 @@ int ima_file_mmap(struct file *file, unsigned long prot) > > if (file && (prot & PROT_EXEC)) { > security_task_getsecid(current, &blob); > - /* scaffolding - until process_measurement changes */ > - return process_measurement(file, current_cred(), blob.secid[0], > + return process_measurement(file, current_cred(), &blob, > NULL, 0, MAY_EXEC, MMAP_CHECK); > } > > @@ -366,16 +365,14 @@ int ima_bprm_check(struct linux_binprm *bprm) > struct lsmblob blob; > > security_task_getsecid(current, &blob); > - /* scaffolding until process_measurement changes */ > - ret = process_measurement(bprm->file, current_cred(), blob.secid[0], > - NULL, 0, MAY_EXEC, BPRM_CHECK); > + ret = process_measurement(bprm->file, current_cred(), &blob, NULL, 0, > + MAY_EXEC, BPRM_CHECK); > if (ret) > return ret; > > security_cred_getsecid(bprm->cred, &blob); > - /* scaffolding until process_measurement changes */ > - return process_measurement(bprm->file, bprm->cred, blob.secid[0], > - NULL, 0, MAY_EXEC, CREDS_CHECK); > + return process_measurement(bprm->file, bprm->cred, &blob, NULL, 0, > + MAY_EXEC, CREDS_CHECK); > } > > /** > @@ -393,8 +390,7 @@ int ima_file_check(struct file *file, int mask) > struct lsmblob blob; > > security_task_getsecid(current, &blob); > - /* scaffolding until process_measurement changes */ > - return process_measurement(file, current_cred(), blob.secid[0], NULL, 0, > + return process_measurement(file, current_cred(), &blob, NULL, 0, > mask & (MAY_READ | MAY_WRITE | MAY_EXEC | > MAY_APPEND), FILE_CHECK); > } > @@ -526,9 +522,8 @@ int ima_post_read_file(struct file *file, void *buf, loff_t size, > > func = read_idmap[read_id] ?: FILE_CHECK; > security_task_getsecid(current, &blob); > - /* scaffolding until process_measurement changes */ > - return process_measurement(file, current_cred(), blob.secid[0], buf, > - size, MAY_READ, func); > + return process_measurement(file, current_cred(), &blob, buf, size, > + MAY_READ, func); > } > > /** > diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c b/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c > index 92ee3d984c73..dbad256aa7b4 100644 > --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c > +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c > @@ -286,7 +286,7 @@ static void ima_lsm_update_rules(void) > * Returns true on rule match, false on failure. > */ > static bool ima_match_rules(struct ima_rule_entry *rule, struct inode *inode, > - const struct cred *cred, u32 secid, > + const struct cred *cred, struct lsmblob *blob, > enum ima_hooks func, int mask) > { > int i; > @@ -345,7 +345,6 @@ static bool ima_match_rules(struct ima_rule_entry *rule, struct inode *inode, > case LSM_SUBJ_USER: > case LSM_SUBJ_ROLE: > case LSM_SUBJ_TYPE: > - lsmblob_init(&blob, secid); > rc = security_filter_rule_match(&blob, > rule->lsm[i].type, > Audit_equal, > @@ -394,7 +393,7 @@ static int get_subaction(struct ima_rule_entry *rule, enum ima_hooks func) > * @inode: pointer to an inode for which the policy decision is being made > * @cred: pointer to a credentials structure for which the policy decision is > * being made > - * @secid: LSM secid of the task to be validated > + * @blob: LSM data of the task to be validated > * @func: IMA hook identifier > * @mask: requested action (MAY_READ | MAY_WRITE | MAY_APPEND | MAY_EXEC) > * @pcr: set the pcr to extend > @@ -406,8 +405,9 @@ static int get_subaction(struct ima_rule_entry *rule, enum ima_hooks func) > * list when walking it. Reads are many orders of magnitude more numerous > * than writes so ima_match_policy() is classical RCU candidate. > */ > -int ima_match_policy(struct inode *inode, const struct cred *cred, u32 secid, > - enum ima_hooks func, int mask, int flags, int *pcr) > +int ima_match_policy(struct inode *inode, const struct cred *cred, > + struct lsmblob *blob, enum ima_hooks func, int mask, > + int flags, int *pcr) > { > struct ima_rule_entry *entry; > int action = 0, actmask = flags | (flags << 1); > @@ -418,7 +418,7 @@ int ima_match_policy(struct inode *inode, const struct cred *cred, u32 secid, > if (!(entry->action & actmask)) > continue; > > - if (!ima_match_rules(entry, inode, cred, secid, func, mask)) > + if (!ima_match_rules(entry, inode, cred, blob, func, mask)) > continue; > > action |= entry->flags & IMA_ACTION_FLAGS; > -- > 2.20.1 > -- Kees Cook