From: Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore.com>
To: Fan Wu <wufan@linux.microsoft.com>
Cc: axboe@kernel.dk, linux-block@vger.kernel.org, tytso@mit.edu,
dm-devel@redhat.com, corbet@lwn.net, roberto.sassu@huawei.com,
Deven Bowers <deven.desai@linux.microsoft.com>,
linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, snitzer@kernel.org, jmorris@namei.org,
zohar@linux.ibm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
ebiggers@kernel.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org,
linux-audit@redhat.com, eparis@redhat.com,
linux-fscrypt@vger.kernel.org, linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org,
agk@redhat.com, serge@hallyn.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v9 03/16] ipe: add evaluation loop and introduce 'boot_verified' as a trust provider
Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2023 16:32:41 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAHC9VhTRpDK74iL6A6wt2=--5LmrC7pHZY_BLnHDdfqboA2i1A@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230410185334.GA18827@linuxonhyperv3.guj3yctzbm1etfxqx2vob5hsef.xx.internal.cloudapp.net>
On Mon, Apr 10, 2023 at 2:53 PM Fan Wu <wufan@linux.microsoft.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 02, 2023 at 02:03:11PM -0500, Paul Moore wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 30, 2023 at 5:58???PM Fan Wu <wufan@linux.microsoft.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > From: Deven Bowers <deven.desai@linux.microsoft.com>
> > >
> > > IPE must have a centralized function to evaluate incoming callers
> > > against IPE's policy. This iteration of the policy against the rules
> > > for that specific caller is known as the evaluation loop.
> > >
> > > In addition, IPE is designed to provide system level trust guarantees,
> > > this usually implies that trust starts from bootup with a hardware root
> > > of trust, which validates the bootloader. After this, the bootloader
> > > verifies the kernel and the initramfs.
> > >
> > > As there's no currently supported integrity method for initramfs, and
> > > it's typically already verified by the bootloader, introduce a property
> > > that causes the first superblock to have an execution to be "pinned",
> > > which is typically initramfs.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Deven Bowers <deven.desai@linux.microsoft.com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Fan Wu <wufan@linux.microsoft.com>
> >
> > ...
> >
> > > ---
> > > security/ipe/Makefile | 1 +
> > > security/ipe/eval.c | 180 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > security/ipe/eval.h | 28 ++++++
> > > security/ipe/hooks.c | 25 +++++
> > > security/ipe/hooks.h | 14 +++
> > > security/ipe/ipe.c | 1 +
> > > security/ipe/policy.c | 20 ++++
> > > security/ipe/policy.h | 3 +
> > > security/ipe/policy_parser.c | 8 +-
> > > 9 files changed, 279 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > > create mode 100644 security/ipe/eval.c
> > > create mode 100644 security/ipe/eval.h
> > > create mode 100644 security/ipe/hooks.c
> > > create mode 100644 security/ipe/hooks.h
...
> > > diff --git a/security/ipe/eval.c b/security/ipe/eval.c
> > > new file mode 100644
> > > index 000000000000..48b5104a3463
> > > --- /dev/null
> > > +++ b/security/ipe/eval.c
> > > @@ -0,0 +1,180 @@
> > > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> > > +/*
> > > + * Copyright (C) Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
> > > + */
> > > +
> > > +#include "ipe.h"
> > > +#include "eval.h"
> > > +#include "hooks.h"
> > > +#include "policy.h"
> > > +
> > > +#include <linux/fs.h>
> > > +#include <linux/types.h>
> > > +#include <linux/slab.h>
> > > +#include <linux/file.h>
> > > +#include <linux/sched.h>
> > > +#include <linux/rcupdate.h>
> > > +#include <linux/spinlock.h>
> > > +
> > > +struct ipe_policy __rcu *ipe_active_policy;
> > > +
> > > +static struct super_block *pinned_sb;
> > > +static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(pin_lock);
> > > +#define FILE_SUPERBLOCK(f) ((f)->f_path.mnt->mnt_sb)
> > > +
> > > +/**
> > > + * pin_sb - Pin the underlying superblock of @f, marking it as trusted.
> > > + * @f: Supplies a file structure to source the super_block from.
> > > + */
> > > +static void pin_sb(const struct file *f)
> > > +{
> > > + if (!f)
> > > + return;
> > > + spin_lock(&pin_lock);
> > > + if (pinned_sb)
> > > + goto out;
> > > + pinned_sb = FILE_SUPERBLOCK(f);
> > > +out:
> > > + spin_unlock(&pin_lock);
> > > +}
> >
> > Since you don't actually use @f, just the super_block, you might
> > consider passing the super_block as the parameter and not the
> > associated file.
> >
> > I'd probably also flip the if-then to avoid the 'goto', for example:
> >
> > static void pin_sb(const struct super_block *sb)
> > {
> > if (!sb)
> > return;
> > spin_lock(&pin_lock);
> > if (!pinned_sb)
> > pinned_sb = sb;
> > spin_unlock(&pin_lock);
> > }
> >
>
> Sure, I can change the code accordingly.
>
> > Also, do we need to worry about the initramfs' being unmounted and the
> > super_block going away?
>
> If initramfs is being unmounted, the boot_verified property will never be TRUE,
> which is an expected behavior. In an actual use case, we can leverage this
> property to only enable files in initramfs during the booting stage, and later switch
> to another policy without the boot_verified property after unmounting the initramfs.
> This approach helps keep the allowed set of files minimum at each stage.
I think I was worried about not catching when the fs was unmounted and
the superblock disappeared, but you've got a hook defined for that so
it should be okay. I'm not sure what I was thinking here, sorry for
the noise ...
Regardless of the source of my confusion, your policy/boot_verified
description all sounds good to me.
--
paul-moore.com
--
Linux-audit mailing list
Linux-audit@redhat.com
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-audit
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-04-11 20:42 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 [this message]
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
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='CAHC9VhTRpDK74iL6A6wt2=--5LmrC7pHZY_BLnHDdfqboA2i1A@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=paul@paul-moore.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=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).