From: Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com>
To: Nayna Jain <nayna@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Lakshmi Ramasubramanian <nramas@linux.microsoft.com>,
Nayna Jain <nayna@linux.ibm.com>,
linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, linux-efi@vger.kernel.org,
linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>,
Jeremy Kerr <jk@ozlabs.org>,
Matthew Garret <matthew.garret@nebula.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
Claudio Carvalho <cclaudio@linux.ibm.com>,
George Wilson <gcwilson@linux.ibm.com>,
Elaine Palmer <erpalmer@us.ibm.com>,
Eric Ricther <erichte@linux.ibm.com>,
"Oliver O'Halloran" <oohall@gmail.com>,
Prakhar Srivastava <prsriva02@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 2/8] powerpc/ima: add support to initialize ima policy rules
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 2019 19:52:03 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1572133923.4532.79.camel@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <27dbe08e-5473-4dd0-d2ad-2df591e23f5e@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
On Fri, 2019-10-25 at 12:02 -0500, Nayna Jain wrote:
> On 10/24/19 12:35 PM, Lakshmi Ramasubramanian wrote:
> > On 10/23/2019 8:47 PM, Nayna Jain wrote:
> >
> >> +/*
> >> + * The "secure_rules" are enabled only on "secureboot" enabled systems.
> >> + * These rules verify the file signatures against known good values.
> >> + * The "appraise_type=imasig|modsig" option allows the known good
> >> signature
> >> + * to be stored as an xattr or as an appended signature.
> >> + *
> >> + * To avoid duplicate signature verification as much as possible,
> >> the IMA
> >> + * policy rule for module appraisal is added only if
> >> CONFIG_MODULE_SIG_FORCE
> >> + * is not enabled.
> >> + */
> >> +static const char *const secure_rules[] = {
> >> + "appraise func=KEXEC_KERNEL_CHECK appraise_type=imasig|modsig",
> >> +#ifndef CONFIG_MODULE_SIG_FORCE
> >> + "appraise func=MODULE_CHECK appraise_type=imasig|modsig",
> >> +#endif
> >> + NULL
> >> +};
> >
> > Is there any way to not use conditional compilation in the above array
> > definition? Maybe define different functions to get "secure_rules" for
> > when CONFIG_MODULE_SIG_FORCE is defined and when it is not defined.
>
> How will you decide which function to be called ?
You could call "is_module_sig_enforced()".
Mimi
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com>
To: Nayna Jain <nayna@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Lakshmi Ramasubramanian <nramas@linux.microsoft.com>,
Nayna Jain <nayna@linux.ibm.com>,
linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, linux-efi@vger.kernel.org,
linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>,
Eric Ricther <erichte@linux.ibm.com>,
Prakhar Srivastava <prsriva02@gmail.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Claudio Carvalho <cclaudio@linux.ibm.com>,
Matthew Garret <matthew.garret@nebula.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>, Jeremy Kerr <jk@ozlabs.org>,
Elaine Palmer <erpalmer@us.ibm.com>,
Oliver O'Halloran <oohall@gmail.com>,
George Wilson <gcwilson@linux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 2/8] powerpc/ima: add support to initialize ima policy rules
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 2019 19:52:03 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1572133923.4532.79.camel@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <27dbe08e-5473-4dd0-d2ad-2df591e23f5e@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
On Fri, 2019-10-25 at 12:02 -0500, Nayna Jain wrote:
> On 10/24/19 12:35 PM, Lakshmi Ramasubramanian wrote:
> > On 10/23/2019 8:47 PM, Nayna Jain wrote:
> >
> >> +/*
> >> + * The "secure_rules" are enabled only on "secureboot" enabled systems.
> >> + * These rules verify the file signatures against known good values.
> >> + * The "appraise_type=imasig|modsig" option allows the known good
> >> signature
> >> + * to be stored as an xattr or as an appended signature.
> >> + *
> >> + * To avoid duplicate signature verification as much as possible,
> >> the IMA
> >> + * policy rule for module appraisal is added only if
> >> CONFIG_MODULE_SIG_FORCE
> >> + * is not enabled.
> >> + */
> >> +static const char *const secure_rules[] = {
> >> + "appraise func=KEXEC_KERNEL_CHECK appraise_type=imasig|modsig",
> >> +#ifndef CONFIG_MODULE_SIG_FORCE
> >> + "appraise func=MODULE_CHECK appraise_type=imasig|modsig",
> >> +#endif
> >> + NULL
> >> +};
> >
> > Is there any way to not use conditional compilation in the above array
> > definition? Maybe define different functions to get "secure_rules" for
> > when CONFIG_MODULE_SIG_FORCE is defined and when it is not defined.
>
> How will you decide which function to be called ?
You could call "is_module_sig_enforced()".
Mimi
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-10-26 23:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 58+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-10-24 3:47 [PATCH v9 0/8] powerpc: Enabling IMA arch specific secure boot policies Nayna Jain
2019-10-24 3:47 ` Nayna Jain
2019-10-24 3:47 ` [PATCH v9 1/8] powerpc: detect the secure boot mode of the system Nayna Jain
2019-10-24 3:47 ` Nayna Jain
2019-10-24 17:26 ` Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2019-10-24 17:26 ` Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2019-10-25 16:49 ` Nayna Jain
2019-10-25 16:49 ` Nayna Jain
2019-10-24 3:47 ` [PATCH v9 2/8] powerpc/ima: add support to initialize ima policy rules Nayna Jain
2019-10-24 3:47 ` Nayna Jain
2019-10-24 17:35 ` Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2019-10-24 17:35 ` Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2019-10-25 17:02 ` Nayna Jain
2019-10-25 17:02 ` Nayna Jain
2019-10-25 18:03 ` Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2019-10-25 18:03 ` Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2019-10-28 23:42 ` Michael Ellerman
2019-10-28 23:42 ` Michael Ellerman
2019-10-26 23:52 ` Mimi Zohar [this message]
2019-10-26 23:52 ` Mimi Zohar
2019-10-28 11:54 ` Mimi Zohar
2019-10-28 11:54 ` Mimi Zohar
2019-10-24 3:47 ` [PATCH v9 3/8] powerpc: detect the trusted boot state of the system Nayna Jain
2019-10-24 3:47 ` Nayna Jain
2019-10-24 17:38 ` Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2019-10-24 17:38 ` Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2019-10-25 16:50 ` Nayna Jain
2019-10-25 16:50 ` Nayna Jain
2019-10-24 3:47 ` [PATCH v9 4/8] powerpc/ima: define trusted boot policy Nayna Jain
2019-10-24 3:47 ` Nayna Jain
2019-10-24 17:40 ` Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2019-10-24 17:40 ` Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2019-10-24 3:47 ` [PATCH v9 5/8] ima: make process_buffer_measurement() generic Nayna Jain
2019-10-24 3:47 ` Nayna Jain
2019-10-24 15:20 ` Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2019-10-24 15:20 ` Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2019-10-25 17:24 ` Nayna Jain
2019-10-25 17:24 ` Nayna Jain
2019-10-25 17:32 ` Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2019-10-25 17:32 ` Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2019-10-27 0:13 ` Mimi Zohar
2019-10-27 0:13 ` Mimi Zohar
2019-10-30 15:22 ` Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2019-10-30 15:22 ` Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2019-10-30 16:35 ` Mimi Zohar
2019-10-30 16:35 ` Mimi Zohar
2019-10-24 3:47 ` [PATCH v9 6/8] certs: add wrapper function to check blacklisted binary hash Nayna Jain
2019-10-24 3:47 ` Nayna Jain
2019-10-24 3:47 ` [PATCH v9 7/8] ima: check against blacklisted hashes for files with modsig Nayna Jain
2019-10-24 3:47 ` Nayna Jain
2019-10-24 17:48 ` Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2019-10-24 17:48 ` Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2019-10-25 17:36 ` Nayna Jain
2019-10-25 17:36 ` Nayna Jain
2019-10-24 3:47 ` [PATCH v9 8/8] powerpc/ima: update ima arch policy to check for blacklist Nayna Jain
2019-10-24 3:47 ` Nayna Jain
2019-10-28 12:10 ` [PATCH v9 0/8] powerpc: Enabling IMA arch specific secure boot policies Mimi Zohar
2019-10-28 12:10 ` Mimi Zohar
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=1572133923.4532.79.camel@linux.ibm.com \
--to=zohar@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org \
--cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=cclaudio@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=erichte@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=erpalmer@us.ibm.com \
--cc=gcwilson@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=jk@ozlabs.org \
--cc=linux-efi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org \
--cc=matthew.garret@nebula.com \
--cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
--cc=nayna@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=nayna@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=nramas@linux.microsoft.com \
--cc=oohall@gmail.com \
--cc=paulus@samba.org \
--cc=prsriva02@gmail.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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.