From: Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com>
To: Romain Naour <romain.naour@smile.fr>,
Paul Menzel <pmenzel@molgen.mpg.de>
Cc: linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org,
linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, serge@hallyn.com,
jmorris@namei.org, paul@paul-moore.com, eric.snowberg@oracle.com,
dmitry.kasatkin@gmail.com, roberto.sassu@huawei.com,
Romain Naour <romain.naour@skf.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] integrity: wait for completion of i2c initialization using late_initcall_sync()
Date: Mon, 01 Jul 2024 22:37:43 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <e197920f27bc67df45327ef56ee509d113435b25.camel@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <d7429218-7b48-4201-8ad9-63728e188be5@smile.fr>
Hi Romain,
Please limit the subject line to 70 - 75 characters.
On Mon, 2024-07-01 at 16:58 +0200, Romain Naour wrote:
> > > [1]
> > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-integrity/9b98d912-ba78-402c-a5c8-154bef8794f7@smile.fr/
> > > [2]
> > > https://e2e.ti.com/support/processors-group/processors/f/processors-forum/1375425/tda4vm-ima-vs-tpm-builtin-driver-boot-order
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Romain Naour <romain.naour@skf.com>
> >
> > Should this get a Fixes: tag and be also applied to the stable series?
>
> The current behavior can be reproduced on any released kernel (at least since
> 6.1). But I'm not sure if it should be backported to stable kernels since it
> delays the ima/evm initialization at runtime.
With the IMA builtin measurement policy specified on the boot command line
("ima_policy=tcb"), moving init_ima from the late_initcall() to
late_initcall_sync() affects the measurement list order. It's unlikely, but
possible, that someone is sealing the TPM to PCR-10. It's probably not a good
idea to backport the change.
An alternative would be to continue using the late_initcall(), but retry on
failure, instead of going directly into TPM-bypass mode.
As far as I can tell, everything is still being measured and verified, but more
testing is required.
Mimi
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-07-02 2:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-07-01 13:38 [RFC] integrity: wait for completion of i2c initialization using late_initcall_sync() Romain Naour
2024-07-01 13:53 ` Paul Menzel
2024-07-01 14:58 ` Romain Naour
2024-07-02 2:37 ` Mimi Zohar [this message]
2024-07-11 14:06 ` Mimi Zohar
2024-08-01 10:12 ` Romain Naour
2024-08-07 0:41 ` Mimi Zohar
2024-08-16 12:46 ` 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=e197920f27bc67df45327ef56ee509d113435b25.camel@linux.ibm.com \
--to=zohar@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=dmitry.kasatkin@gmail.com \
--cc=eric.snowberg@oracle.com \
--cc=jmorris@namei.org \
--cc=linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=paul@paul-moore.com \
--cc=pmenzel@molgen.mpg.de \
--cc=roberto.sassu@huawei.com \
--cc=romain.naour@skf.com \
--cc=romain.naour@smile.fr \
--cc=serge@hallyn.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).