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=-1.0 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS 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 48EFEC43381 for ; Fri, 22 Mar 2019 20:36:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2292021900 for ; Fri, 22 Mar 2019 20:36:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727865AbfCVUgc (ORCPT ); Fri, 22 Mar 2019 16:36:32 -0400 Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.156.1]:57394 "EHLO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727330AbfCVUgc (ORCPT ); Fri, 22 Mar 2019 16:36:32 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098394.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id x2MKYfHW010548 for ; Fri, 22 Mar 2019 16:36:31 -0400 Received: from e06smtp05.uk.ibm.com (e06smtp05.uk.ibm.com [195.75.94.101]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2rd4pydbc4-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Fri, 22 Mar 2019 16:36:31 -0400 Received: from localhost by e06smtp05.uk.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Fri, 22 Mar 2019 20:36:18 -0000 Received: from b06cxnps3075.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (9.149.109.195) by e06smtp05.uk.ibm.com (192.168.101.135) with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted; (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256/256) Fri, 22 Mar 2019 20:36:16 -0000 Received: from d06av25.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06av25.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.105.61]) by b06cxnps3075.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id x2MKaPac60489922 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 22 Mar 2019 20:36:26 GMT Received: from d06av25.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id D158611C050; Fri, 22 Mar 2019 20:36:25 +0000 (GMT) Received: from d06av25.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D11A11C04A; Fri, 22 Mar 2019 20:36:25 +0000 (GMT) Received: from dhcp-9-31-103-153.watson.ibm.com (unknown [9.31.103.153]) by d06av25.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Fri, 22 Mar 2019 20:36:25 +0000 (GMT) Subject: Re: Adding cmldine args measure to ima From: Mimi Zohar To: Prakhar Srivastava , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org" Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2019 16:36:24 -0400 In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.20.5 (3.20.5-1.fc24) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 x-cbid: 19032220-0020-0000-0000-000003268396 X-IBM-AV-DETECTION: SAVI=unused REMOTE=unused XFE=unused x-cbparentid: 19032220-0021-0000-0000-00002178B1A3 Message-Id: <1553286984.5291.2.camel@linux.ibm.com> X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:,, definitions=2019-03-22_12:,, signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=3 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1810050000 definitions=main-1903220146 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 2019-03-22 at 17:27 +0000, Prakhar Srivastava wrote: > Hi, > > Currently Kexec (kexec_file_load) code path does not measure the cmdline > arguments passed to the next kernel.The boot_aggregate won't change since > the EFI loader hasn't been triggered. Attesting the same in K2 has no impact. > Adding the cmdline measurement will add some attestable criteria. > > To account for the cmdline passed, we are looking at using IMA to measure and > pass the buffer so that it can be attested. > > Do you have any alternate solutions/concerns with this approach? I started looking at this a couple of years ago, but haven't had time. I definitely don't have problems with extending IMA to measure the boot command line. Mimi