linux-security-module.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore.com>
To: Mike Snitzer <snitzer@kernel.org>
Cc: Fan Wu <wufan@linux.microsoft.com>,
	corbet@lwn.net, zohar@linux.ibm.com,  jmorris@namei.org,
	serge@hallyn.com, tytso@mit.edu, ebiggers@kernel.org,
	 axboe@kernel.dk, agk@redhat.com, eparis@redhat.com,
	linux-doc@vger.kernel.org,  linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org,  fsverity@lists.linux.dev,
	linux-block@vger.kernel.org,  dm-devel@lists.linux.dev,
	audit@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	 Deven Bowers <deven.desai@linux.microsoft.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v15 14/21] dm verity: consume root hash digest and signature data via LSM hook
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2024 13:23:17 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAHC9VhTkpSa665tesTEs8gBjaD3ahUMATGMXuGy+-unt7WL-UQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZfpHxkmRy0oqxZVF@redhat.com>

On Tue, Mar 19, 2024 at 10:19 PM Mike Snitzer <snitzer@kernel.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 19 2024 at  7:00P -0400,
> Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore.com> wrote:
> > On Mar 15, 2024 Fan Wu <wufan@linux.microsoft.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > dm-verity provides a strong guarantee of a block device's integrity. As
> > > a generic way to check the integrity of a block device, it provides
> > > those integrity guarantees to its higher layers, including the filesystem
> > > level.
> > >
> > > An LSM that control access to a resource on the system based on the
> > > available integrity claims can use this transitive property of
> > > dm-verity, by querying the underlying block_device of a particular
> > > file.
> > >
> > > The digest and signature information need to be stored in the block
> > > device to fulfill the next requirement of authorization via LSM policy.
> > > This will enable the LSM to perform revocation of devices that are still
> > > mounted, prohibiting execution of files that are no longer authorized
> > > by the LSM in question.
> > >
> > > This patch adds two security hook calls in dm-verity to save the
> > > dm-verity roothash and the roothash signature to the block device's
> > > LSM blobs. The hook calls are depended on CONFIG_IPE_PROP_DM_VERITY,
> > > which will be introduced in the next commit.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Deven Bowers <deven.desai@linux.microsoft.com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Fan Wu <wufan@linux.microsoft.com>
> > > ---
> > > v2:
> > >   + No Changes
> > >
> > > v3:
> > >   + No changes
> > >
> > > v4:
> > >   + No changes
> > >
> > > v5:
> > >   + No changes
> > >
> > > v6:
> > >   + Fix an improper cleanup that can result in
> > >     a leak
> > >
> > > v7:
> > >   + Squash patch 08/12, 10/12 to [11/16]
> > >   + Use part0 for block_device, to retrieve the block_device, when
> > >     calling security_bdev_setsecurity
> > >
> > > v8:
> > >   + Undo squash of 08/12, 10/12 - separating drivers/md/ from
> > >     security/ & block/
> > >   + Use common-audit function for dmverity_signature.
> > >   + Change implementation for storing the dm-verity digest to use the
> > >     newly introduced dm_verity_digest structure introduced in patch
> > >     14/20.
> > >   + Create new structure, dm_verity_digest, containing digest algorithm,
> > >     size, and digest itself to pass to the LSM layer. V7 was missing the
> > >     algorithm.
> > >   + Create an associated public header containing this new structure and
> > >     the key values for the LSM hook, specific to dm-verity.
> > >   + Additional information added to commit, discussing the layering of
> > >     the changes and how the information passed will be used.
> > >
> > > v9:
> > >   + No changes
> > >
> > > v10:
> > >   + No changes
> > >
> > > v11:
> > >   + Add an optional field to save signature
> > >   + Move the security hook call to the new finalize hook
> > >
> > > v12:
> > >   + No changes
> > >
> > > v13:
> > >   + No changes
> > >
> > > v14:
> > >   + Correct code format
> > >   + Remove unnecessary header and switch to dm_disk()
> > >
> > > v15:
> > >   + Refactor security_bdev_setsecurity() to security_bdev_setintegrity()
> > >   + Remove unnecessary headers
> > > ---
> > >  drivers/md/dm-verity-target.c | 73 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > >  drivers/md/dm-verity.h        |  6 +++
> > >  include/linux/dm-verity.h     | 12 ++++++
> > >  include/linux/security.h      |  2 +
> > >  4 files changed, 93 insertions(+)
> > >  create mode 100644 include/linux/dm-verity.h
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/md/dm-verity-target.c b/drivers/md/dm-verity-target.c
> > > index bb5da66da4c1..e94cc6a755d5 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/md/dm-verity-target.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/md/dm-verity-target.c
> > > @@ -22,6 +22,8 @@
> > >  #include <linux/scatterlist.h>
> > >  #include <linux/string.h>
> > >  #include <linux/jump_label.h>
> > > +#include <linux/security.h>
> > > +#include <linux/dm-verity.h>
> > >
> > >  #define DM_MSG_PREFIX                      "verity"
> > >
> > > @@ -1017,6 +1019,38 @@ static void verity_io_hints(struct dm_target *ti, struct queue_limits *limits)
> > >     blk_limits_io_min(limits, limits->logical_block_size);
> > >  }
> > >
> > > +#ifdef CONFIG_IPE_PROP_DM_VERITY
> > > +
> > > +static int verity_init_sig(struct dm_verity *v, const void *sig,
> > > +                      size_t sig_size)
> > > +{
> > > +   v->sig_size = sig_size;
> > > +   v->root_digest_sig = kmalloc(v->sig_size, GFP_KERNEL);
> > > +   if (!v->root_digest)
> > > +           return -ENOMEM;
> >
> > Either you meant to copy @sig into @v->root_digest_sig and forgot to
> > add the code for that, or we don't need to include @sig as a parameter
> > to this function.  I'm guessing it is the former as it wouldn't make
> > sense to even have dm_verity::root_digest_sig if we weren't stashing
> > it here.
> >
> > I'd also suggest looking at kmemdup() instead of a kmalloc()/memcpy()
> > combo.
> >
> > > +   return 0;
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > +static void verity_free_sig(struct dm_verity *v)
> > > +{
> > > +   kfree(v->root_digest_sig);
> > > +}
> > > +#else
> > > +
> > > +static inline int verity_init_sig(struct dm_verity *v, const void *sig,
> > > +                             size_t sig_size)
> > > +{
> > > +   return 0;
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > +static inline void verity_free_sig(struct dm_verity *v)
> > > +{
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > +#endif /* CONFIG_IPE_PROP_DM_VERITY */
> >
> > It's been a while since I looked at this patch in the patchset, so
> > maybe I'm missing something, but in general we don't want CONFIG_XXX
> > checks in the kernel, outside of security/, that are specific to a
> > particular LSM (what happens when multiple LSMs need this?).  Please
> > use CONFIG_SECURITY instead.
> >
> > >  static void verity_dtr(struct dm_target *ti)
> > >  {
> > >     struct dm_verity *v = ti->private;
> > > @@ -1035,6 +1069,7 @@ static void verity_dtr(struct dm_target *ti)
> > >     kfree(v->salt);
> > >     kfree(v->root_digest);
> > >     kfree(v->zero_digest);
> > > +   verity_free_sig(v);
> > >
> > >     if (v->tfm)
> > >             crypto_free_ahash(v->tfm);
> > > @@ -1434,6 +1469,13 @@ static int verity_ctr(struct dm_target *ti, unsigned int argc, char **argv)
> > >             ti->error = "Root hash verification failed";
> > >             goto bad;
> > >     }
> > > +
> > > +   r = verity_init_sig(v, verify_args.sig, verify_args.sig_size);
> > > +   if (r < 0) {
> > > +           ti->error = "Cannot allocate root digest signature";
> > > +           goto bad;
> > > +   }
> > > +
> > >     v->hash_per_block_bits =
> > >             __fls((1 << v->hash_dev_block_bits) / v->digest_size);
> > >
> > > @@ -1584,6 +1626,34 @@ int dm_verity_get_root_digest(struct dm_target *ti, u8 **root_digest, unsigned i
> > >     return 0;
> > >  }
> > >
> > > +#ifdef CONFIG_IPE_PROP_DM_VERITY
> > > +
> > > +static int verity_finalize(struct dm_target *ti)
> > > +{
> > > +   struct block_device *bdev;
> > > +   struct dm_verity_digest root_digest;
> > > +   struct dm_verity *v;
> > > +   int r;
> > > +
> > > +   v = ti->private;
> > > +   bdev = dm_disk(dm_table_get_md(ti->table))->part0;
> > > +   root_digest.digest = v->root_digest;
> > > +   root_digest.digest_len = v->digest_size;
> > > +   root_digest.alg = v->alg_name;
> > > +
> > > +   r = security_bdev_setintegrity(bdev, LSM_INTGR_DMV_ROOTHASH, &root_digest,
> > > +                                  sizeof(root_digest));
> > > +   if (r)
> > > +           return r;
> > > +
> > > +   return security_bdev_setintegrity(bdev,
> > > +                                     LSM_INTGR_DMV_SIG,
> > > +                                     v->root_digest_sig,
> > > +                                     v->sig_size);
> >
> > What happens if the second call fails, should we clear the
> > LSM_INTGR_DMV_ROOTHASH state in the LSM?
> >
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > +#endif /* CONFIG_IPE_PROP_DM_VERITY */
> >
> > See my comments about CONFIG_SECURITY above.  In fact, I would suggest
> > moving this up into that part of the file so you only need one #ifdef
> > block relating to CONFIG_SECURITY.
> >
> > I would also recommend making a dummy function so we can get rid of
> > the conditional compilation in @verity_target below.  For example:
> >
> >   #ifdef CONFIG_SECURITY
> >   static int verity_finalize(struct dm_target *ti)
> >   {
> >     /* real implementation */
> >   }
> >   #else
> >   static int verity_finalize(struct dm_target *ti)
> >   {
> >     return 0;
> >   }
> >   #endif /* CONFIG_SECURITY */
> >
> > >  static struct target_type verity_target = {
> > >     .name           = "verity",
> > >     .features       = DM_TARGET_SINGLETON | DM_TARGET_IMMUTABLE,
> > > @@ -1596,6 +1666,9 @@ static struct target_type verity_target = {
> > >     .prepare_ioctl  = verity_prepare_ioctl,
> > >     .iterate_devices = verity_iterate_devices,
> > >     .io_hints       = verity_io_hints,
> > > +#ifdef CONFIG_IPE_PROP_DM_VERITY
> > > +   .finalize       = verity_finalize,
> > > +#endif /* CONFIG_IPE_PROP_DM_VERITY */
> > >  };
> > >  module_dm(verity);
> >
> > If you create a dummy verity_finalize() function like above you can
> > get rid of the #ifdef checks.
>
> Think it is better to leave it as-is, to avoid calling the .finalize
> hook if it isn't actually needed.

Fair enough, my personal preference is to minimize Kconfig conditional
code flow changes such as this, but I understand your point of view
and device-mapper is your code after all.

I believe the other issues still need to be addressed, but other than
that are you generally okay with the new "finalize" hook approach?

-- 
paul-moore.com

  reply	other threads:[~2024-03-20 17:23 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 41+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-03-16  3:35 [RFC PATCH v15 00/21] Integrity Policy Enforcement LSM (IPE) Fan Wu
2024-03-16  3:35 ` [RFC PATCH v15 01/21] security: add ipe lsm Fan Wu
2024-03-16  3:35 ` [RFC PATCH v15 02/21] ipe: add policy parser Fan Wu
2024-03-16  3:35 ` [RFC PATCH v15 03/21] ipe: add evaluation loop Fan Wu
2024-03-16  3:35 ` [RFC PATCH v15 04/21] ipe: add LSM hooks on execution and kernel read Fan Wu
2024-03-16  3:35 ` [RFC PATCH v15 05/21] initramfs|security: Add a security hook to do_populate_rootfs() Fan Wu
2024-03-18  0:29   ` Casey Schaufler
2024-03-18  1:58     ` Paul Moore
2024-03-16  3:35 ` [RFC PATCH v15 06/21] ipe: introduce 'boot_verified' as a trust provider Fan Wu
2024-03-16  3:35 ` [RFC PATCH v15 07/21] security: add new securityfs delete function Fan Wu
2024-03-16  3:35 ` [RFC PATCH v15 08/21] ipe: add userspace interface Fan Wu
2024-03-16  3:35 ` [RFC PATCH v15 09/21] uapi|audit|ipe: add ipe auditing support Fan Wu
2024-03-16  3:35 ` [RFC PATCH v15 10/21] ipe: add permissive toggle Fan Wu
2024-03-16  3:35 ` [RFC PATCH v15 11/21] block|security: add LSM blob to block_device Fan Wu
2024-03-16  3:35 ` [RFC PATCH v15 12/21] security: add security_bdev_setintegrity() hook Fan Wu
2024-03-19 23:00   ` [PATCH RFC " Paul Moore
2024-03-20  8:28     ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2024-03-20  8:31       ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2024-03-20 20:31         ` Fan Wu
2024-03-21 17:25           ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2024-03-16  3:35 ` [RFC PATCH v15 13/21] dm: add finalize hook to target_type Fan Wu
2024-03-16  3:35 ` [RFC PATCH v15 14/21] dm verity: consume root hash digest and signature data via LSM hook Fan Wu
2024-03-19 23:00   ` [PATCH RFC " Paul Moore
2024-03-20  2:19     ` Mike Snitzer
2024-03-20 17:23       ` Paul Moore [this message]
2024-03-20 18:49         ` Mike Snitzer
2024-03-20 17:56     ` Fan Wu
2024-03-16  3:35 ` [RFC PATCH v15 15/21] ipe: add support for dm-verity as a trust provider Fan Wu
2024-03-16  3:35 ` [RFC PATCH v15 16/21] security: add security_inode_setintegrity() hook Fan Wu
2024-03-19 23:00   ` [PATCH RFC " Paul Moore
2024-03-16  3:35 ` [RFC PATCH v15 17/21] fsverity: consume builtin signature via LSM hook Fan Wu
2024-03-18  5:29   ` Eric Biggers
2024-03-19 23:00     ` Paul Moore
2024-03-16  3:35 ` [RFC PATCH v15 18/21] ipe: enable support for fs-verity as a trust provider Fan Wu
2024-03-18  5:17   ` Eric Biggers
2024-03-18  8:08     ` Roberto Sassu
2024-03-18 20:58       ` Fan Wu
2024-03-18 20:40     ` Fan Wu
2024-03-16  3:35 ` [RFC PATCH v15 19/21] scripts: add boot policy generation program Fan Wu
2024-03-16  3:35 ` [RFC PATCH v15 20/21] ipe: kunit test for parser Fan Wu
2024-03-16  3:35 ` [RFC PATCH v15 21/21] documentation: add ipe documentation Fan Wu

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=CAHC9VhTkpSa665tesTEs8gBjaD3ahUMATGMXuGy+-unt7WL-UQ@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=paul@paul-moore.com \
    --cc=agk@redhat.com \
    --cc=audit@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=corbet@lwn.net \
    --cc=deven.desai@linux.microsoft.com \
    --cc=dm-devel@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=ebiggers@kernel.org \
    --cc=eparis@redhat.com \
    --cc=fsverity@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=jmorris@namei.org \
    --cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=serge@hallyn.com \
    --cc=snitzer@kernel.org \
    --cc=tytso@mit.edu \
    --cc=wufan@linux.microsoft.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).