From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Petr Vorel Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2019 18:10:43 +0200 Subject: [LTP] [PATCH v3 3/4] ima/ima_measurements.sh: Require builtin IMA tcb policy In-Reply-To: <1560352011.4578.43.camel@linux.ibm.com> References: <20190611193021.17651-1-pvorel@suse.cz> <20190611193021.17651-4-pvorel@suse.cz> <1560352011.4578.43.camel@linux.ibm.com> Message-ID: <20190613161042.GA24675@dell5510> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit To: ltp@lists.linux.it Hi Mimi, thanks a lot for your review. > On Tue, 2019-06-11 at 21:30 +0200, Petr Vorel wrote: > > Although custom policy which contains tcb can be loaded via dracut, > ^which may contain the equivalent measurement tcb rules I'm going to address this in v4. > > systemd or later manually from user space, detecting it would require > > IMA_READ_POLICY=y. In order to simplify the check and avoid false > > positives lets ignore this option and require builtin IMA tcb policy. > This test is for adding new measurements to the measurement list. Sure. So what should I change in commit message? > > Signed-off-by: Petr Vorel > > --- > > .../kernel/security/integrity/ima/tests/ima_measurements.sh | 3 ++- > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/testcases/kernel/security/integrity/ima/tests/ima_measurements.sh b/testcases/kernel/security/integrity/ima/tests/ima_measurements.sh > > index 328affc43..a3aa24d8a 100755 > > --- a/testcases/kernel/security/integrity/ima/tests/ima_measurements.sh > > +++ b/testcases/kernel/security/integrity/ima/tests/ima_measurements.sh > > @@ -57,7 +57,8 @@ setup() > > [ -z "$DIGEST_INDEX" ] && tst_brk TCONF \ > > "Cannot find digest index (template: '$template')" > > - tst_res TINFO "IMA measurement tests assume tcb policy to be loaded (ima_policy=tcb)" > > + grep -q -e ima_policy=[a-z_]*tcb -e ima_tcb -e ima_appraise_tcb /proc/cmdline || \ > > + tst_brk TCONF "IMA measurement tests require builtin IMA tcb policy (ima_policy=tcb or ima_policy=appraise_tcb kernel parameter)" > > } > "appraise_tcb" doesn't provide the necessary measurement rules. > "ima_policy=" isn't order specific.  The check would be for "|tcb", "| > tcb", "tcb|", "tcb |", or just "=tcb".  The deprecated "ima_tcb" > option is fine too. Going to change in v4. > Mimi Kind regards, Petr