From: Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, keyrings@vger.kernel.org,
petkan@mip-labs.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 02/20] KEYS: Add a system blacklist keyring [ver #2]
Date: Mon, 08 Feb 2016 08:34:32 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1454938472.2648.173.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <24522.1454513272@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
On Wed, 2016-02-03 at 15:27 +0000, David Howells wrote:
> Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> > > (3) The ability to configure a list of blacklisted hashes into the kernel
> > > at build time. This is done by setting
> > > CONFIG_SYSTEM_BLACKLIST_HASH_LIST to the filename of a list of hashes
> > > that are in the form:
> > >
> > > "<hash>", "<hash>", ..., "<hash>"
> > >
> > > where each <hash> is a hex string representation of the hash and must
> > > include all necessary leading zeros to pad the hash to the right size.
> >
> > Is the output of "keyctl print" the hex string representation?
>
> No, there is no payload and no read method. "keyctl desc" will return the hex
> string representation.
>
> > Update keys documentation?
>
> Not a bad idea, but it should probably go in a separate document, along with
> info about asymmetric keys.
>
> > > The blacklist cannot currently be modified by userspace, but it will be
> > > possible to load it, for example, from the UEFI blacklist database.
> >
> > When loading the UEFI blacklist database is enabled, it should be
> > configurable.
>
> Probably. That patch isn't added yet though.
>
> > > In the future, it should also be made possible to load blacklisted
> > > asymmetric keys in here too.
> >
> > Please update to reflect patch 3/20 "X.509: Allow X.509 certs to be
> > blacklisted" adds this support.
>
> Changed to:
>
> A later commit will make it possible to load blacklisted asymmetric
> keys in here too.
As you said, only the kernel can load keys on the blacklist, not
userspace, and the patch for loading the UEFI blacklist keys on the
system blacklist keyring is not included in this patch set, wouldn't it
be better to separate the concept of a general blacklist keyring from
the concept of trust? In addition, this patch set removes the IMA
blacklist without any method for adding blacklisted IMA keys to the
system blacklist keyring. I suggest a separate blacklist patch set
that adds support: for a system blacklist keyring, different types of
keys being black listed, allow userspace to load blacklisted keys on the
system blacklist keyring, convert the ima_blacklist to use the general
system blacklist keyring and, optionally, include the UEFI blacklist
keys on the blacklist keyring.
This patch set would then be limited to "how certificates/keys are
determined to be trusted." By separating out the blacklist keyring from
the issue of trust, you'll have smaller patch sets that can more easily
be reviewed. (Reviewing anything having to do with certificates is
difficult enough.) It would also allow you to upstream the two patch
sets independently of each other.
Mimi
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-02-08 13:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 56+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-01-19 11:30 [RFC PATCH 00/20] KEYS: Restrict additions to 'trusted' keyrings [ver #2] David Howells
2016-01-19 11:30 ` [RFC PATCH 01/20] KEYS: Add an alloc flag to convey the builtinness of a key " David Howells
2016-01-20 18:58 ` Mimi Zohar
2016-02-03 15:30 ` David Howells
2016-01-19 11:30 ` [RFC PATCH 02/20] KEYS: Add a system blacklist keyring " David Howells
2016-01-20 19:31 ` Mimi Zohar
2016-01-20 20:26 ` Mimi Zohar
2016-02-03 15:27 ` David Howells
2016-02-08 13:34 ` Mimi Zohar [this message]
2016-02-08 13:55 ` David Howells
2016-02-08 15:03 ` Mimi Zohar
2016-02-08 15:53 ` How to add additional blacklist entries? David Howells
2016-02-08 16:32 ` Mimi Zohar
2016-02-08 16:43 ` David Howells
2016-02-08 19:28 ` Mimi Zohar
2016-02-09 10:42 ` David Howells
2016-02-10 14:07 ` Mimi Zohar
2016-02-08 14:55 ` [RFC PATCH 02/20] KEYS: Add a system blacklist keyring [ver #2] David Howells
2016-02-08 16:39 ` Mimi Zohar
2016-02-19 11:48 ` David Howells
2016-02-03 15:29 ` David Howells
2016-01-19 11:30 ` [RFC PATCH 03/20] X.509: Allow X.509 certs to be blacklisted " David Howells
2016-01-20 20:33 ` Mimi Zohar
2016-02-03 15:46 ` David Howells
2016-02-05 16:16 ` Mimi Zohar
2016-01-19 11:30 ` [RFC PATCH 04/20] X.509: Don't treat self-signed keys specially " David Howells
2016-01-20 20:40 ` Mimi Zohar
2016-01-19 11:31 ` [RFC PATCH 05/20] KEYS: Generalise system_verify_data() to provide access to internal content " David Howells
2016-01-19 11:31 ` [RFC PATCH 06/20] PKCS#7: Make trust determination dependent on contents of trust keyring " David Howells
2016-01-19 11:31 ` [RFC PATCH 07/20] KEYS: Add a facility to restrict new links into a " David Howells
2016-02-08 11:59 ` Mimi Zohar
2016-02-29 15:49 ` David Howells
2016-01-19 11:31 ` [RFC PATCH 08/20] KEYS: Allow authentication data to be stored in an asymmetric key " David Howells
2016-01-19 11:31 ` [RFC PATCH 09/20] KEYS: Add identifier pointers to public_key_signature struct " David Howells
2016-01-19 11:31 ` [RFC PATCH 10/20] X.509: Retain the key verification data " David Howells
2016-01-19 11:31 ` [RFC PATCH 11/20] X.509: Extract signature digest and make self-signed cert checks earlier " David Howells
2016-01-19 11:31 ` [RFC PATCH 12/20] PKCS#7: Make the signature a pointer rather than embedding it " David Howells
2016-02-08 12:00 ` Mimi Zohar
2016-02-19 11:56 ` David Howells
2016-01-19 11:32 ` [RFC PATCH 13/20] X.509: Move the trust validation code out to its own file " David Howells
2016-02-08 11:59 ` Mimi Zohar
2016-01-19 11:32 ` [RFC PATCH 14/20] KEYS: Generalise x509_request_asymmetric_key() " David Howells
2016-02-08 11:59 ` Mimi Zohar
2016-01-19 11:32 ` [RFC PATCH 15/20] KEYS: Move the point of trust determination to __key_link() " David Howells
2016-01-19 11:32 ` [RFC PATCH 16/20] KEYS: Remove KEY_FLAG_TRUSTED and KEY_ALLOC_TRUSTED " David Howells
2016-01-19 11:32 ` [RFC PATCH 17/20] PKCS#7: Handle blacklisted certificates " David Howells
2016-01-19 11:32 ` [RFC PATCH 18/20] IMA: Use the system blacklist keyring " David Howells
2016-02-10 19:12 ` Mimi Zohar
2016-02-19 11:58 ` David Howells
2016-02-19 12:16 ` Mimi Zohar
2016-01-19 11:32 ` [RFC PATCH 19/20] certs: Add a secondary system keyring that can be added to dynamically " David Howells
2016-01-19 11:32 ` [RFC PATCH 20/20] IMA: Replace the .ima_mok keyring with the secondary system keyring " David Howells
2016-01-20 17:24 ` [RFC PATCH 00/20] KEYS: Restrict additions to 'trusted' keyrings " Petko Manolov
2016-01-20 18:57 ` Mimi Zohar
2016-02-03 15:47 ` David Howells
2016-02-03 15:56 ` David Howells
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=1454938472.2648.173.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=keyrings@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=petkan@mip-labs.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).