All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>
To: Daniel Kiper <daniel.kiper@oracle.com>,
	linux-efi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	x86@kernel.org, xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
Cc: ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org, boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com,
	eric.snowberg@oracle.com, hpa@zytor.com, jgross@suse.com,
	konrad.wilk@oracle.com, mingo@redhat.com, tglx@linutronix.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] x86/xen/efi: Initialize UEFI secure boot state during dom0 boot
Date: Tue, 03 Apr 2018 08:44:41 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1522770281.4522.14.camel@HansenPartnership.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1522766345-4169-1-git-send-email-daniel.kiper@oracle.com>

On Tue, 2018-04-03 at 16:39 +0200, Daniel Kiper wrote:
> Initialize UEFI secure boot state during dom0 boot. Otherwise the
> kernel
> may not even know that it runs on secure boot enabled platform.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Kiper <daniel.kiper@oracle.com>
> ---
>  arch/x86/xen/efi.c                        |   57
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  drivers/firmware/efi/libstub/secureboot.c |    3 ++
>  2 files changed, 60 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/x86/xen/efi.c b/arch/x86/xen/efi.c
> index a18703b..1804b27 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/xen/efi.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/xen/efi.c
> @@ -115,6 +115,61 @@ static efi_system_table_t __init
> *xen_efi_probe(void)
>  	return &efi_systab_xen;
>  }
>  
> +/*
> + * Determine whether we're in secure boot mode.
> + *
> + * Please keep the logic in sync with
> + * drivers/firmware/efi/libstub/secureboot.c:efi_get_secureboot().
> + */
> +static enum efi_secureboot_mode xen_efi_get_secureboot(void)
> +{
> +	static efi_guid_t efi_variable_guid =
> EFI_GLOBAL_VARIABLE_GUID;
> +	static efi_guid_t shim_guid = EFI_SHIM_LOCK_GUID;
> +	efi_status_t status;
> +	u8 moksbstate, secboot, setupmode;
> +	unsigned long size;
> +
> +	size = sizeof(secboot);
> +	status = efi.get_variable(L"SecureBoot", &efi_variable_guid,
> +				  NULL, &size, &secboot);
> +
> +	if (status == EFI_NOT_FOUND)
> +		return efi_secureboot_mode_disabled;
> +
> +	if (status != EFI_SUCCESS)
> +		goto out_efi_err;
> +
> +	size = sizeof(setupmode);
> +	status = efi.get_variable(L"SetupMode", &efi_variable_guid,
> +				  NULL, &size, &setupmode);
> +
> +	if (status != EFI_SUCCESS)
> +		goto out_efi_err;
> +
> +	if (secboot == 0 || setupmode == 1)
> +		return efi_secureboot_mode_disabled;
> +
> +	/* See if a user has put the shim into insecure mode. */
> +	size = sizeof(moksbstate);
> +	status = efi.get_variable(L"MokSBStateRT", &shim_guid,
> +				  NULL, &size, &moksbstate);
> +
> +	/* If it fails, we don't care why. Default to secure. */
> +	if (status != EFI_SUCCESS)
> +		goto secure_boot_enabled;
> +
> +	if (moksbstate == 1)
> +		return efi_secureboot_mode_disabled;
> +
> + secure_boot_enabled:
> +	pr_info("UEFI Secure Boot is enabled.\n");
> +	return efi_secureboot_mode_enabled;
> +
> + out_efi_err:
> +	pr_err("Could not determine UEFI Secure Boot status.\n");
> +	return efi_secureboot_mode_unknown;
> +}
> +

This looks like a bad idea: you're duplicating the secure boot check in

drivers/firmware/efi/libstub/secureboot.c

Which is an implementation of policy.  If we have to have policy in the
kernel, it should really only be in one place to prevent drift; why
can't you simply use the libstub efi_get_secureboot() so we're not
duplicating the implementation of policy?

James

  reply	other threads:[~2018-04-03 15:44 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-04-03 14:39 [PATCH v2] x86/xen/efi: Initialize UEFI secure boot state during dom0 boot Daniel Kiper
2018-04-03 15:44 ` James Bottomley [this message]
2018-04-03 16:07   ` Daniel Kiper
2018-04-03 17:00     ` James Bottomley
2018-04-03 17:00     ` James Bottomley
2018-04-04 10:38       ` Daniel Kiper
2018-04-04 10:38       ` Daniel Kiper
2018-04-11  8:56         ` Daniel Kiper
2018-04-11  8:56         ` Daniel Kiper
2018-04-16  8:15           ` Ard Biesheuvel
2018-04-16  8:15           ` Ard Biesheuvel
2018-04-16  9:04             ` Daniel Kiper
2018-04-16  9:04             ` Daniel Kiper
2018-04-03 16:07   ` Daniel Kiper
2018-04-03 15:44 ` James Bottomley
2018-04-03 14:39 Daniel Kiper

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=1522770281.4522.14.camel@HansenPartnership.com \
    --to=james.bottomley@hansenpartnership.com \
    --cc=ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org \
    --cc=boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com \
    --cc=daniel.kiper@oracle.com \
    --cc=eric.snowberg@oracle.com \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=jgross@suse.com \
    --cc=konrad.wilk@oracle.com \
    --cc=linux-efi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=x86@kernel.org \
    --cc=xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org \
    /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.