From: <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: krzysztof.struczynski@huawei.com, roberto.sassu@huawei.com,
zohar@linux.ibm.com
Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: FAILED: patch "[PATCH] ima: Set again build_ima_appraise variable" failed to apply to 5.4-stable tree
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2020 18:31:18 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <15924978789846@kroah.com> (raw)
The patch below does not apply to the 5.4-stable tree.
If someone wants it applied there, or to any other stable or longterm
tree, then please email the backport, including the original git commit
id to <stable@vger.kernel.org>.
thanks,
greg k-h
------------------ original commit in Linus's tree ------------------
From b59fda449cf07f2db3be3a67142e6c000f5e8d79 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Krzysztof Struczynski <krzysztof.struczynski@huawei.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2020 12:28:59 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] ima: Set again build_ima_appraise variable
After adding the new add_rule() function in commit c52657d93b05
("ima: refactor ima_init_policy()"), all appraisal flags are added to the
temp_ima_appraise variable. Revert to the previous behavior instead of
removing build_ima_appraise, to benefit from the protection offered by
__ro_after_init.
The mentioned commit introduced a bug, as it makes all the flags
modifiable, while build_ima_appraise flags can be protected with
__ro_after_init.
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # 5.0.x
Fixes: c52657d93b05 ("ima: refactor ima_init_policy()")
Co-developed-by: Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@huawei.com>
Signed-off-by: Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@huawei.com>
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Struczynski <krzysztof.struczynski@huawei.com>
Signed-off-by: Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com>
diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c b/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c
index ea9b991f0232..ef7f68cc935e 100644
--- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c
+++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c
@@ -643,8 +643,14 @@ static void add_rules(struct ima_rule_entry *entries, int count,
list_add_tail(&entry->list, &ima_policy_rules);
}
- if (entries[i].action == APPRAISE)
- temp_ima_appraise |= ima_appraise_flag(entries[i].func);
+ if (entries[i].action == APPRAISE) {
+ if (entries != build_appraise_rules)
+ temp_ima_appraise |=
+ ima_appraise_flag(entries[i].func);
+ else
+ build_ima_appraise |=
+ ima_appraise_flag(entries[i].func);
+ }
}
}
reply other threads:[~2020-06-18 16:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: [no followups] expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed
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=15924978789846@kroah.com \
--to=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=krzysztof.struczynski@huawei.com \
--cc=roberto.sassu@huawei.com \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=zohar@linux.ibm.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).