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=-6.5 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no 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 3F0F8C433E1 for ; Fri, 10 Jul 2020 18:05:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [203.11.71.2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 99BBB20720 for ; Fri, 10 Jul 2020 18:05:40 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="gMuDc4HL"; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="gMuDc4HL" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 99BBB20720 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Received: from bilbo.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [IPv6:2401:3900:2:1::3]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B3LYt2YDZzDrP2 for ; Sat, 11 Jul 2020 04:05:38 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com (client-ip=205.139.110.120; helo=us-smtp-1.mimecast.com; envelope-from=bmeneg@redhat.com; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; unprotected) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=mimecast20190719 header.b=gMuDc4HL; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=mimecast20190719 header.b=gMuDc4HL; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from us-smtp-1.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com [205.139.110.120]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4B3LWs33kQzDrN7 for ; Sat, 11 Jul 2020 04:03:51 +1000 (AEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1594404228; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=XN24PGjpaeX+61Yzd0yY+PTaQgU43gwsWj3Uzow6ocE=; b=gMuDc4HLeuzzON83UD4BZ09Tz3U3eKNRJ9sFsD9y+h+AzZN2yi0vi1ADplxRUsNcST9Sww mP4bRtmFAfZ9XmDRtcmjaPXMe+H9uev225v8q3FTcxFe0hiGquxhAJMyrKJFy60CS/aITl zK0CL4bfI7bL2lC/+b8Un+ptkT0S+kk= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1594404228; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=XN24PGjpaeX+61Yzd0yY+PTaQgU43gwsWj3Uzow6ocE=; b=gMuDc4HLeuzzON83UD4BZ09Tz3U3eKNRJ9sFsD9y+h+AzZN2yi0vi1ADplxRUsNcST9Sww mP4bRtmFAfZ9XmDRtcmjaPXMe+H9uev225v8q3FTcxFe0hiGquxhAJMyrKJFy60CS/aITl zK0CL4bfI7bL2lC/+b8Un+ptkT0S+kk= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-90-_VnW-mdIMea6fAcU4Rjghg-1; Fri, 10 Jul 2020 14:03:41 -0400 X-MC-Unique: _VnW-mdIMea6fAcU4Rjghg-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx05.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.15]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D4A628027E4; Fri, 10 Jul 2020 18:03:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (ovpn-116-13.gru2.redhat.com [10.97.116.13]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 518907EF89; Fri, 10 Jul 2020 18:03:39 +0000 (UTC) Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2020 15:03:38 -0300 From: Bruno Meneguele To: Mimi Zohar Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] ima: move APPRAISE_BOOTPARAM dependency on ARCH_POLICY to runtime Message-ID: <20200710180338.GA10547@glitch> References: <20200709164647.45153-1-bmeneg@redhat.com> <1594401804.14405.8.camel@linux.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1594401804.14405.8.camel@linux.ibm.com> X-PGP-Key: http://keys.gnupg.net/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x3823031E4660608D X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.15 Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=bmeneg@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="IS0zKkzwUGydFO0o" Content-Disposition: inline X-BeenThere: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, nayna@linux.ibm.com, erichte@linux.ibm.com, x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org, linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Linuxppc-dev" --IS0zKkzwUGydFO0o Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, Jul 10, 2020 at 01:23:24PM -0400, Mimi Zohar wrote: > On Thu, 2020-07-09 at 13:46 -0300, Bruno Meneguele wrote: > > APPRAISE_BOOTPARAM has been marked as dependent on !ARCH_POLICY in comp= ile > > time, enforcing the appraisal whenever the kernel had the arch policy o= ption > > enabled. >=20 > > However it breaks systems where the option is set but the system didn't > > boot in a "secure boot" platform. In this scenario, anytime an appraisa= l > > policy (i.e. ima_policy=3Dappraisal_tcb) is used it will be forced, wit= hout > > giving the user the opportunity to label the filesystem, before enforci= ng > > integrity. > >=20 > > Considering the ARCH_POLICY is only effective when secure boot is actua= lly > > enabled this patch remove the compile time dependency and move it to a > > runtime decision, based on the secure boot state of that platform. >=20 > Perhaps we could simplify this patch description a bit? >=20 > The IMA_APPRAISE_BOOTPARAM config allows enabling different > "ima_appraise=3D" modes - log, fix, enforce - at run time, but not when > IMA architecture specific policies are enabled. =A0This prevents > properly labeling the filesystem on systems where secure boot is > supported, but not enabled on the platform. =A0Only when secure boot is > enabled, should these IMA appraise modes be disabled. >=20 > This patch removes the compile time dependency and makes it a runtime > decision, based on the secure boot state of that platform. >=20 Sounds good to me. > >=20 > > diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_appraise.c b/security/integrity= /ima/ima_appraise.c > > index a9649b04b9f1..884de471b38a 100644 > > --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_appraise.c > > +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_appraise.c > > @@ -19,6 +19,11 @@ > > static int __init default_appraise_setup(c >=20 > > har *str) > > { > > #ifdef CONFIG_IMA_APPRAISE_BOOTPARAM > > +=09if (arch_ima_get_secureboot()) { > > +=09=09pr_info("appraise boot param ignored: secure boot enabled"); >=20 > Instead of a generic statement, is it possible to include the actual > option being denied? =A0Perhaps something like: "Secure boot enabled, > ignoring %s boot command line option" >=20 > Mimi >=20 Yes, sure. Thanks! > > +=09=09return 1; > > +=09} > > + > > =09if (strncmp(str, "off", 3) =3D=3D 0) > > =09=09ima_appraise =3D 0; > > =09else if (strncmp(str, "log", 3) =3D=3D 0) >=20 --=20 bmeneg=20 PGP Key: http://bmeneg.com/pubkey.txt --IS0zKkzwUGydFO0o Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAEBCAAdFiEEdWo6nTbnZdbDmXutYdRkFR+RokMFAl8IrXoACgkQYdRkFR+R okMw7wf/QLnOgC+jQhpff5dmbxQXCG/rSbdtVKMUjIej817eUaAGovHn4XwicYqn xCg2qIqTHuF4e5aYOsVB+kRIVdNZI2GVL27O0SArwFrPgvvOan3CKK5nStQkXRr9 XsLBEsgLKDV91xaQxBXrxWSslJWln5YFZNZYxvOsrhiRLwt4m7P0eSIForfL4UI2 OoJhwTCuBBMEi906mhlmOQwFyTi9/NMQluwf2iB+moJzRMo79cfFU6D//rP9RfoP yttKBvpWqWUbPQ3cAVHkke+Yqr06Cz8BDYT3hP0oRJaludvY2Q/xVjBIOi3sX0gI dx8A3npnWwj0SUi90M+u4rIHQm9vCA== =X95t -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --IS0zKkzwUGydFO0o--