All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
To: Jason Gunthorpe <jgunthorpe@obsidianresearch.com>
Cc: tpmdd-devel@lists.sourceforge.net,
	linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org,
	Peter Huewe <peterhuewe@gmx.de>,
	Marcel Selhorst <tpmdd@selhorst.net>,
	open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] tpm: define a command filter
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2017 16:36:00 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170124143600.siyhblj67qaatewi@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170124001918.GA29735@obsidianresearch.com>

On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 05:19:18PM -0700, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 02:02:52AM +0200, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> > This commit adds a command filter for whitelisting a set of commands in
> > a TPM space. When a TPM space is created through /dev/tpms0, no
> > commands are allowed. The user of the TPM space must explicitly define
> > the list of commands allowed before sending any commands. This ioctl is
> > a one shot call so that a resource manager daemon can call it before
> > sending the file descriptor to the client.
> 
> I don't think it makes sense to have a daemon in user space that
> passes an open'd /dev/tpms0 FD directly to a client..
> 
> It is trivial and more powerful to just proxy the messages. Can you
> see some reason why passing a FD through a daemon would make sense?
> 
> The earlier discussion with James was to have some way to apply a
> global command filter to all tpms0 users with the idea that the
> 'right' restricted command set would enable a 0666 cdev node, and no
> daemon.

Is that a conflicting goal?

Maybe the ioctl could be restricted by CAP_MAC_ADMIN in that case?

How would you propose to change the code below? I guess the "core
code" is about right and this is more about API, am I right?

/Jarkko

> 
> > Signed-off-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
> > 1. This patch applies on top of 'tabrm4' brach.
> > 2. Only compilation is tested (just drafted the idea)
> >  drivers/char/tpm/tpm-interface.c | 12 +++++--
> >  drivers/char/tpm/tpm.h           |  1 +
> >  drivers/char/tpm/tpm2-space.c    |  7 ++++
> >  drivers/char/tpm/tpms-dev.c      | 75 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >  include/uapi/linux/tpms.h        | 29 ++++++++++++++++
> 
> BTW, don't forget to update kbuild when you add uapi files... Applies
> to other patches..
> 
> Jason

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen-VuQAYsv1563Yd54FQh9/CA@public.gmane.org>
To: Jason Gunthorpe
	<jgunthorpe-ePGOBjL8dl3ta4EC/59zMFaTQe2KTcn/@public.gmane.org>
Cc: linux-security-module-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
	tpmdd-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org,
	open list <linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] tpm: define a command filter
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2017 16:36:00 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170124143600.siyhblj67qaatewi@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170124001918.GA29735-ePGOBjL8dl3ta4EC/59zMFaTQe2KTcn/@public.gmane.org>

On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 05:19:18PM -0700, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 02:02:52AM +0200, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> > This commit adds a command filter for whitelisting a set of commands in
> > a TPM space. When a TPM space is created through /dev/tpms0, no
> > commands are allowed. The user of the TPM space must explicitly define
> > the list of commands allowed before sending any commands. This ioctl is
> > a one shot call so that a resource manager daemon can call it before
> > sending the file descriptor to the client.
> 
> I don't think it makes sense to have a daemon in user space that
> passes an open'd /dev/tpms0 FD directly to a client..
> 
> It is trivial and more powerful to just proxy the messages. Can you
> see some reason why passing a FD through a daemon would make sense?
> 
> The earlier discussion with James was to have some way to apply a
> global command filter to all tpms0 users with the idea that the
> 'right' restricted command set would enable a 0666 cdev node, and no
> daemon.

Is that a conflicting goal?

Maybe the ioctl could be restricted by CAP_MAC_ADMIN in that case?

How would you propose to change the code below? I guess the "core
code" is about right and this is more about API, am I right?

/Jarkko

> 
> > Signed-off-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen-VuQAYsv1563Yd54FQh9/CA@public.gmane.org>
> > 1. This patch applies on top of 'tabrm4' brach.
> > 2. Only compilation is tested (just drafted the idea)
> >  drivers/char/tpm/tpm-interface.c | 12 +++++--
> >  drivers/char/tpm/tpm.h           |  1 +
> >  drivers/char/tpm/tpm2-space.c    |  7 ++++
> >  drivers/char/tpm/tpms-dev.c      | 75 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >  include/uapi/linux/tpms.h        | 29 ++++++++++++++++
> 
> BTW, don't forget to update kbuild when you add uapi files... Applies
> to other patches..
> 
> Jason

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot

  reply	other threads:[~2017-01-24 14:36 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-01-24  0:02 [PATCH RFC] tpm: define a command filter Jarkko Sakkinen
2017-01-24  0:02 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2017-01-24  0:19 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2017-01-24 14:36   ` Jarkko Sakkinen [this message]
2017-01-24 14:36     ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2017-01-24 19:07     ` Jason Gunthorpe
2017-01-25 20:21       ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2017-01-25 20:21         ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2017-01-25 22:11         ` Jason Gunthorpe
2017-01-25 22:11           ` Jason Gunthorpe
2017-01-26 11:14           ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2017-01-26 18:05             ` Jason Gunthorpe
2017-01-27  6:42               ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2017-01-27  6:42                 ` Jarkko Sakkinen

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=20170124143600.siyhblj67qaatewi@intel.com \
    --to=jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=jgunthorpe@obsidianresearch.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=peterhuewe@gmx.de \
    --cc=tpmdd-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
    --cc=tpmdd@selhorst.net \
    /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.