linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Matthew Garrett <mjg59@google.com>
To: Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: jmorris@namei.org,
	LSM List <linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PULL REQUEST] Lock down patches
Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2019 19:33:16 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CACdnJuvn4uC075+Z99CaO3YGjJ+4nviPj=4TEQpkndC3JwFovg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1551404654.10911.276.camel@linux.ibm.com>

On Thu, Feb 28, 2019 at 5:45 PM Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 2019-02-28 at 17:01 -0800, Matthew Garrett wrote:
>
> > > That's not a valid reason for preventing systems that do use IMA for
> > > verifying the kexec kernel image signature or kernel module signatures
> > > from enabling "lock down".  This just means that there needs to be
> > > some coordination between the different signature verification
> > > methods. [1][2]
> >
> > I agree, but the current form of the integration makes it impossible
> > for anyone using an IMA-enabled kernel (but not using IMA) to do
> > anything unless they have IMA signatures. It's a problem we need to
> > solve, I just don't think it's a problem we need to solve before
> > merging the patchset.
>
> That's simply not true.  Have you even looked at the IMA architecture
> patches?

Sorry, I think we're talking at cross purposes - I was referring to
your patch "ima: require secure_boot rules in lockdown mode"
(https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/dhowells/linux-fs.git/commit/?h=efi-lock-down&id=7fa3734bd31a4b3fe71358fcba8d4878e5005b7f).
If the goal is just to use the architecture rules then I don't see any
conflict, and as far as I can tell things would just work as is if I
drop the ima portion from "kexec_file: Restrict at runtime if the
kernel is locked down"? Apologies, I'd thought that the secure_boot
ruleset was still intended to be used in a lockdown environment.

  reply	other threads:[~2019-03-01  3:33 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 45+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-02-28 21:28 [PULL REQUEST] Lock down patches Matthew Garrett
2019-02-28 22:20 ` Mimi Zohar
2019-02-28 23:13   ` Matthew Garrett
2019-03-01  0:05     ` Mimi Zohar
2019-03-01  1:01       ` Matthew Garrett
2019-03-01  1:44         ` Mimi Zohar
2019-03-01  3:33           ` Matthew Garrett [this message]
2019-03-01  4:16             ` Mimi Zohar
2019-02-28 22:44 ` [PATCH 01/27] Add the ability to lock down access to the running kernel image Matthew Garrett
2019-02-28 22:44   ` [PATCH 02/27] Add a SysRq option to lift kernel lockdown Matthew Garrett
2019-02-28 23:10 ` [PATCH 01/27] Add the ability to lock down access to the running kernel image Matthew Garrett
2019-02-28 23:10   ` [PATCH 02/27] Add a SysRq option to lift kernel lockdown Matthew Garrett
2019-02-28 23:11 ` [PATCH 01/27] Add the ability to lock down access to the running kernel image Matthew Garrett
2019-02-28 23:11   ` [PATCH 02/27] Add a SysRq option to lift kernel lockdown Matthew Garrett
2019-02-28 23:11 ` [PATCH 01/27] Add the ability to lock down access to the running kernel image Matthew Garrett
2019-02-28 23:11   ` [PATCH 02/27] Add a SysRq option to lift kernel lockdown Matthew Garrett
2019-02-28 23:11   ` [PATCH 03/27] Enforce module signatures if the kernel is locked down Matthew Garrett
2019-02-28 23:11   ` [PATCH 04/27] Restrict /dev/{mem,kmem,port} when " Matthew Garrett
2019-02-28 23:11   ` [PATCH 05/27] kexec_load: Disable at runtime if " Matthew Garrett
2019-02-28 23:11   ` [PATCH 06/27] Copy secure_boot flag in boot params across kexec reboot Matthew Garrett
2019-02-28 23:11   ` [PATCH 07/27] kexec_file: split KEXEC_VERIFY_SIG into KEXEC_SIG and KEXEC_SIG_FORCE Matthew Garrett
2019-02-28 23:11   ` [PATCH 08/27] kexec_file: Restrict at runtime if the kernel is locked down Matthew Garrett
2019-03-01  2:05     ` Mimi Zohar
2019-02-28 23:11   ` [PATCH 09/27] hibernate: Disable when " Matthew Garrett
2019-03-19 22:15     ` Pavel Machek
2019-02-28 23:11   ` [PATCH 10/27] uswsusp: " Matthew Garrett
2019-02-28 23:11   ` [PATCH 11/27] PCI: Lock down BAR access " Matthew Garrett
2019-02-28 23:11   ` [PATCH 12/27] x86: Lock down IO port " Matthew Garrett
2019-02-28 23:11   ` [PATCH 13/27] x86/msr: Restrict MSR " Matthew Garrett
2019-02-28 23:11   ` [PATCH 14/27] ACPI: Limit access to custom_method " Matthew Garrett
2019-02-28 23:11   ` [PATCH 15/27] acpi: Ignore acpi_rsdp kernel param when the kernel has been " Matthew Garrett
2019-02-28 23:11   ` [PATCH 16/27] acpi: Disable ACPI table override if the kernel is " Matthew Garrett
2019-02-28 23:11   ` [PATCH 17/27] acpi: Disable APEI error injection " Matthew Garrett
2019-02-28 23:11   ` [PATCH 18/27] Prohibit PCMCIA CIS storage when " Matthew Garrett
2019-02-28 23:11   ` [PATCH 19/27] Lock down TIOCSSERIAL Matthew Garrett
2019-02-28 23:11   ` [PATCH 20/27] Lock down module params that specify hardware parameters (eg. ioport) Matthew Garrett
2019-02-28 23:11   ` [PATCH 21/27] x86/mmiotrace: Lock down the testmmiotrace module Matthew Garrett
2019-02-28 23:11   ` [PATCH 22/27] Lock down /proc/kcore Matthew Garrett
2019-02-28 23:11   ` [PATCH 23/27] Lock down kprobes Matthew Garrett
2019-02-28 23:12   ` [PATCH 24/27] bpf: Restrict kernel image access functions when the kernel is locked down Matthew Garrett
2019-02-28 23:12   ` [PATCH 25/27] Lock down perf Matthew Garrett
2019-02-28 23:12   ` [PATCH 26/27] debugfs: Restrict debugfs when the kernel is locked down Matthew Garrett
2019-02-28 23:12   ` [PATCH 27/27] lockdown: Print current->comm in restriction messages Matthew Garrett
2019-02-28 23:24 ` [PULL REQUEST] Lock down patches Randy Dunlap
2019-03-04 22:10 ` Matthew Garrett

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='CACdnJuvn4uC075+Z99CaO3YGjJ+4nviPj=4TEQpkndC3JwFovg@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=mjg59@google.com \
    --cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
    --cc=jmorris@namei.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-security-module@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).