linux-audit.redhat.com archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@huaweicloud.com>
To: Fan Wu <wufan@linux.microsoft.com>,
	corbet@lwn.net, zohar@linux.ibm.com, jmorris@namei.org,
	serge@hallyn.com, tytso@mit.edu, ebiggers@kernel.org,
	 axboe@kernel.dk, agk@redhat.com, snitzer@kernel.org,
	eparis@redhat.com,  paul@paul-moore.com
Cc: dm-devel@redhat.com, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org,
	Deven Bowers <deven.desai@linux.microsoft.com>,
	roberto.sassu@huawei.com, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-block@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-fscrypt@vger.kernel.org, linux-audit@redhat.com,
	linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v9 06/16] ipe: add LSM hooks on execution and kernel read
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2023 13:51:39 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <412da9a9da2e75e896911f01bfd735dd4b5789f4.camel@huaweicloud.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1675119451-23180-7-git-send-email-wufan@linux.microsoft.com>

On Mon, 2023-01-30 at 14:57 -0800, Fan Wu wrote:
> From: Deven Bowers <deven.desai@linux.microsoft.com>
> 
> IPE's initial goal is to control both execution and the loading of
> kernel modules based on the system's definition of trust. It
> accomplishes this by plugging into the security hooks for
> bprm_check_security, file_mprotect, mmap_file, kernel_load_data,
> and kernel_read_data.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Deven Bowers <deven.desai@linux.microsoft.com>
> Signed-off-by: Fan Wu <wufan@linux.microsoft.com>
> ---
> v2:
>   + Split evaluation loop, access control hooks,
>     and evaluation loop from policy parser and userspace
>     interface to pass mailing list character limit
> 
> v3:
>   + Move ipe_load_properties to patch 04.
>   + Remove useless 0-initializations
>   + Prefix extern variables with ipe_
>   + Remove kernel module parameters, as these are
>     exposed through sysctls.
>   + Add more prose to the IPE base config option
>     help text.
>   + Use GFP_KERNEL for audit_log_start.
>   + Remove unnecessary caching system.
>   + Remove comments from headers
>   + Use rcu_access_pointer for rcu-pointer null check
>   + Remove usage of reqprot; use prot only.
>   + Move policy load and activation audit event to 03/12
> 
> v4:
>   + Remove sysctls in favor of securityfs nodes
>   + Re-add kernel module parameters, as these are now
>     exposed through securityfs.
>   + Refactor property audit loop to a separate function.
> 
> v5:
>   + fix minor grammatical errors
>   + do not group rule by curly-brace in audit record,
>     reconstruct the exact rule.
> 
> v6:
>   + No changes
> 
> v7:
>   + Further split lsm creation, the audit system, the evaluation loop
>     and access control hooks into separate commits.
> 
> v8:
>   + Rename hook functions to follow the lsmname_hook_name convention
>   + Remove ipe_hook enumeration, can be derived from correlation with
>     syscall audit record.
> 
> v9:
>   + Minor changes for adapting to the new parser
> ---
>  security/ipe/hooks.c | 169 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  security/ipe/hooks.h |  13 ++++
>  security/ipe/ipe.c   |   6 ++
>  3 files changed, 188 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/security/ipe/hooks.c b/security/ipe/hooks.c
> index 335b773c7ae1..fd5109e29c76 100644
> --- a/security/ipe/hooks.c
> +++ b/security/ipe/hooks.c
> @@ -23,3 +23,172 @@ void ipe_sb_free_security(struct super_block *mnt_sb)
>  {
>  	ipe_invalidate_pinned_sb(mnt_sb);
>  }
> +
> +/**
> + * ipe_bprm_check_security - ipe security hook function for bprm check.
> + * @bprm: Supplies a pointer to a linux_binprm structure to source the file
> + *	  being evaluated.
> + *
> + * This LSM hook is called when a binary is loaded through the exec
> + * family of system calls.
> + * Return:
> + * *0	- OK
> + * *!0	- Error
> + */
> +int ipe_bprm_check_security(struct linux_binprm *bprm)
> +{
> +	struct ipe_eval_ctx ctx = { 0 };
> +
> +	build_eval_ctx(&ctx, bprm->file, ipe_op_exec);
> +	return ipe_evaluate_event(&ctx);
> +}
> +
> +/**
> + * ipe_mmap_file - ipe security hook function for mmap check.
> + * @f: File being mmap'd. Can be NULL in the case of anonymous memory.
> + * @reqprot: The requested protection on the mmap, passed from usermode.
> + * @prot: The effective protection on the mmap, resolved from reqprot and
> + *	  system configuration.
> + * @flags: Unused.
> + *
> + * This hook is called when a file is loaded through the mmap
> + * family of system calls.
> + *
> + * Return:
> + * * 0	- OK
> + * * !0	- Error
> + */
> +int ipe_mmap_file(struct file *f, unsigned long reqprot, unsigned long prot,
> +		  unsigned long flags)
> +{
> +	struct ipe_eval_ctx ctx = { 0 };
> +
> +	if (prot & PROT_EXEC || reqprot & PROT_EXEC) {

Since the kernel only adds flags and doesn't clear them, isn't safe to
just consider prot? Oh, you mentioned it in the changelog, maybe just
for ipe_file_mprotect().

> +		build_eval_ctx(&ctx, f, ipe_op_exec);
> +		return ipe_evaluate_event(&ctx);
> +	}

Uhm, I think some considerations that IMA does for mmap() are relevant
also for IPE.

For example, look at mmap_violation_check(). It checks if there are
writable mappings, and if yes, it denies the access.

Similarly for mprotect(), is adding PROT_EXEC safe?

> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +/**
> + * ipe_file_mprotect - ipe security hook function for mprotect check.
> + * @vma: Existing virtual memory area created by mmap or similar.
> + * @reqprot: The requested protection on the mmap, passed from usermode.
> + * @prot: The effective protection on the mmap, resolved from reqprot and
> + *	  system configuration.
> + *
> + * This LSM hook is called when a mmap'd region of memory is changing
> + * its protections via mprotect.
> + *
> + * Return:
> + * * 0	- OK
> + * * !0	- Error
> + */
> +int ipe_file_mprotect(struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long reqprot,
> +		      unsigned long prot)
> +{
> +	struct ipe_eval_ctx ctx = { 0 };
> +
> +	/* Already Executable */
> +	if (vma->vm_flags & VM_EXEC)
> +		return 0;
> +
> +	if (prot & PROT_EXEC) {
> +		build_eval_ctx(&ctx, vma->vm_file, ipe_op_exec);
> +		return ipe_evaluate_event(&ctx);
> +	}
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +/**
> + * ipe_kernel_read_file - ipe security hook function for kernel read.
> + * @file: Supplies a pointer to the file structure being read in from disk.
> + * @id: Supplies the enumeration identifying the purpose of the read.
> + * @contents: Unused.
> + *
> + * This LSM hook is called when a file is being read in from disk from
> + * the kernel.
> + *
> + * Return:
> + * 0 - OK
> + * !0 - Error
> + */
> +int ipe_kernel_read_file(struct file *file, enum kernel_read_file_id id,
> +			 bool contents)
> +{
> +	enum ipe_op_type op;
> +	struct ipe_eval_ctx ctx;
> +
> +	switch (id) {
> +	case READING_FIRMWARE:
> +		op = ipe_op_firmware;
> +		break;
> +	case READING_MODULE:
> +		op = ipe_op_kernel_module;
> +		break;
> +	case READING_KEXEC_INITRAMFS:
> +		op = ipe_op_kexec_initramfs;
> +		break;
> +	case READING_KEXEC_IMAGE:
> +		op = ipe_op_kexec_image;
> +		break;
> +	case READING_POLICY:
> +		op = ipe_op_ima_policy;
> +		break;
> +	case READING_X509_CERTIFICATE:
> +		op = ipe_op_ima_x509;
> +		break;
> +	default:
> +		op = ipe_op_max;
> +		WARN(op == ipe_op_max, "no rule setup for enum %d", id);
> +	}
> +
> +	build_eval_ctx(&ctx, file, op);
> +	return ipe_evaluate_event(&ctx);
> +}
> +
> +/**
> + * ipe_kernel_load_data - ipe security hook function for kernel load data.
> + * @id: Supplies the enumeration identifying the purpose of the read.
> + * @contents: Unused.
> + *
> + * This LSM hook is called when a buffer is being read in from disk.
> + *
> + * Return:
> + * * 0	- OK
> + * * !0	- Error
> + */
> +int ipe_kernel_load_data(enum kernel_load_data_id id, bool contents)
> +{
> +	enum ipe_op_type op;
> +	struct ipe_eval_ctx ctx = { 0 };
> +
> +	switch (id) {
> +	case LOADING_FIRMWARE:
> +		op = ipe_op_firmware;
> +		break;
> +	case LOADING_MODULE:
> +		op = ipe_op_kernel_module;
> +		break;
> +	case LOADING_KEXEC_INITRAMFS:
> +		op = ipe_op_kexec_initramfs;
> +		break;
> +	case LOADING_KEXEC_IMAGE:
> +		op = ipe_op_kexec_image;
> +		break;
> +	case LOADING_POLICY:
> +		op = ipe_op_ima_policy;
> +		break;
> +	case LOADING_X509_CERTIFICATE:
> +		op = ipe_op_ima_x509;
> +		break;
> +	default:
> +		op = ipe_op_max;
> +		WARN(op == ipe_op_max, "no rule setup for enum %d", id);
> +	}
> +
> +	build_eval_ctx(&ctx, NULL, op);
> +	return ipe_evaluate_event(&ctx);
> +}
> diff --git a/security/ipe/hooks.h b/security/ipe/hooks.h
> index 30fe455389bf..857cae69678c 100644
> --- a/security/ipe/hooks.h
> +++ b/security/ipe/hooks.h
> @@ -11,4 +11,17 @@
>  
>  void ipe_sb_free_security(struct super_block *mnt_sb);
>  
> +int ipe_bprm_check_security(struct linux_binprm *bprm);
> +
> +int ipe_mmap_file(struct file *f, unsigned long reqprot, unsigned long prot,
> +		  unsigned long flags);
> +
> +int ipe_file_mprotect(struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long reqprot,
> +		      unsigned long prot);
> +
> +int ipe_kernel_read_file(struct file *file, enum kernel_read_file_id id,
> +			 bool contents);
> +
> +int ipe_kernel_load_data(enum kernel_load_data_id id, bool contents);
> +
>  #endif /* IPE_HOOKS_H */
> diff --git a/security/ipe/ipe.c b/security/ipe/ipe.c
> index bef923026b50..7af2f942decd 100644
> --- a/security/ipe/ipe.c
> +++ b/security/ipe/ipe.c
> @@ -4,6 +4,7 @@
>   */
>  
>  #include "ipe.h"
> +#include "hooks.h"
>  
>  bool ipe_enabled;
>  
> @@ -12,6 +13,11 @@ static struct lsm_blob_sizes ipe_blobs __lsm_ro_after_init = {
>  
>  static struct security_hook_list ipe_hooks[] __lsm_ro_after_init = {
>  	LSM_HOOK_INIT(sb_free_security, ipe_sb_free_security),
> +	LSM_HOOK_INIT(bprm_check_security, ipe_bprm_check_security),
> +	LSM_HOOK_INIT(mmap_file, ipe_mmap_file),
> +	LSM_HOOK_INIT(file_mprotect, ipe_file_mprotect),
> +	LSM_HOOK_INIT(kernel_read_file, ipe_kernel_read_file),
> +	LSM_HOOK_INIT(kernel_load_data, ipe_kernel_load_data),
>  };

Uhm, maybe I would incorporate patch 1 with this.

Roberto

--
Linux-audit mailing list
Linux-audit@redhat.com
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-audit


  reply	other threads:[~2023-01-31 13:51 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 74+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-01-30 22:57 [RFC PATCH v9 00/16] Integrity Policy Enforcement LSM (IPE) Fan Wu
2023-01-30 22:57 ` [RFC PATCH v9 01/16] security: add ipe lsm Fan Wu
2023-03-02 19:00   ` Paul Moore
2023-04-06 19:20     ` Fan Wu
2023-01-30 22:57 ` [RFC PATCH v9 02/16] ipe: add policy parser Fan Wu
2023-01-31 10:53   ` Roberto Sassu
2023-02-01 22:38     ` Fan Wu
2023-03-02 19:02   ` Paul Moore
2023-04-06 20:00     ` Fan Wu
2023-04-11 19:13       ` Paul Moore
2023-01-30 22:57 ` [RFC PATCH v9 03/16] ipe: add evaluation loop and introduce 'boot_verified' as a trust provider Fan Wu
2023-01-31 10:29   ` Roberto Sassu
2023-01-31 15:49   ` Roberto Sassu
2023-02-10 23:21     ` Fan Wu
2023-03-02  2:33       ` Paul Moore
2023-03-02 19:03   ` Paul Moore
2023-04-10 18:53     ` Fan Wu
2023-04-11 20:32       ` Paul Moore
2023-01-30 22:57 ` [RFC PATCH v9 04/16] security: add new securityfs delete function Fan Wu
2023-01-30 22:57 ` [RFC PATCH v9 05/16] ipe: add userspace interface Fan Wu
2023-01-31 10:49   ` Roberto Sassu
2023-02-01 19:46     ` Fan Wu
2023-03-02 19:04   ` Paul Moore
2023-04-10 19:10     ` Fan Wu
2023-04-11 21:45       ` Paul Moore
2023-04-12 23:36         ` Fan Wu
2023-04-13 18:45           ` Paul Moore
2023-04-17 18:06             ` Fan Wu
2023-04-17 20:16               ` Paul Moore
2023-04-17 21:18                 ` Fan Wu
2023-04-17 21:31                   ` Paul Moore
2023-01-30 22:57 ` [RFC PATCH v9 06/16] ipe: add LSM hooks on execution and kernel read Fan Wu
2023-01-31 12:51   ` Roberto Sassu [this message]
2023-02-09 22:42     ` Fan Wu
2023-03-02 19:05   ` Paul Moore
2023-04-10 21:22     ` Fan Wu
2023-01-30 22:57 ` [RFC PATCH v9 07/16] uapi|audit|ipe: add ipe auditing support Fan Wu
2023-01-31 12:57   ` Roberto Sassu
2023-01-31 17:10   ` Steve Grubb
2023-03-02 19:05     ` Paul Moore
2023-03-16 22:53       ` Fan Wu
2023-04-11 23:07         ` Paul Moore
2023-04-11 23:21       ` Paul Moore
2023-01-30 22:57 ` [RFC PATCH v9 08/16] ipe: add permissive toggle Fan Wu
2023-03-02 19:06   ` Paul Moore
2023-01-30 22:57 ` [RFC PATCH v9 09/16] block|security: add LSM blob to block_device Fan Wu
2023-01-31  8:53   ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-01-31 23:01     ` Fan Wu
2023-03-02 19:07   ` Paul Moore
2023-01-30 22:57 ` [RFC PATCH v9 10/16] dm-verity: consume root hash digest and signature data via LSM hook Fan Wu
2023-01-31 13:22   ` Roberto Sassu
2023-02-01 23:26     ` Fan Wu
2023-02-02  8:21       ` Roberto Sassu
2023-02-07 23:52         ` Fan Wu
2023-01-30 22:57 ` [RFC PATCH v9 11/16] ipe: add support for dm-verity as a trust provider Fan Wu
2023-03-02 19:08   ` Paul Moore
2023-03-16 22:10     ` Fan Wu
2023-01-30 22:57 ` [RFC PATCH v9 12/16] fsverity: consume builtin signature via LSM hook Fan Wu
2023-02-09  3:30   ` Eric Biggers
2023-02-09 22:21     ` Fan Wu
2023-01-30 22:57 ` [RFC PATCH v9 13/16] ipe: enable support for fs-verity as a trust provider Fan Wu
2023-01-31 14:00   ` Roberto Sassu
2023-02-01 23:50     ` Fan Wu
2023-02-02  9:51       ` Roberto Sassu
2023-02-08  0:16         ` Fan Wu
2023-01-30 22:57 ` [RFC PATCH v9 14/16] scripts: add boot policy generation program Fan Wu
2023-01-30 22:57 ` [RFC PATCH v9 15/16] ipe: kunit test for parser Fan Wu
2023-01-30 22:57 ` [RFC PATCH v9 16/16] documentation: add ipe documentation Fan Wu
2023-01-31  3:59   ` Bagas Sanjaya
2023-02-02  0:19     ` Fan Wu
2023-01-31 14:22 ` [RFC PATCH v9 00/16] Integrity Policy Enforcement LSM (IPE) Roberto Sassu
2023-02-01  0:48   ` Fan Wu
2023-02-02 10:48     ` Roberto Sassu
2023-02-08  0:31       ` Fan Wu

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=412da9a9da2e75e896911f01bfd735dd4b5789f4.camel@huaweicloud.com \
    --to=roberto.sassu@huaweicloud.com \
    --cc=agk@redhat.com \
    --cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
    --cc=corbet@lwn.net \
    --cc=deven.desai@linux.microsoft.com \
    --cc=dm-devel@redhat.com \
    --cc=ebiggers@kernel.org \
    --cc=eparis@redhat.com \
    --cc=jmorris@namei.org \
    --cc=linux-audit@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-fscrypt@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=paul@paul-moore.com \
    --cc=roberto.sassu@huawei.com \
    --cc=serge@hallyn.com \
    --cc=snitzer@kernel.org \
    --cc=tytso@mit.edu \
    --cc=wufan@linux.microsoft.com \
    --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).