From: Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org,
linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
Eric Biederman <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
kexec@lists.infradead.org, Andres Rodriguez <andresx7@gmail.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>,
Matthew Garrett <mjg59@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 5/8] ima: based on policy require signed firmware (sysfs fallback)
Date: Fri, 01 Jun 2018 19:04:45 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1527894285.13403.43.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180601224617.GU4511@wotan.suse.de>
On Sat, 2018-06-02 at 00:46 +0200, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 01, 2018 at 06:39:55PM -0400, Mimi Zohar wrote:
> > On Fri, 2018-06-01 at 20:21 +0200, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> > > On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 02:01:57PM -0400, Mimi Zohar wrote:
> > > > Luis, is the security_kernel_post_read_file LSM hook in
> > > > firmware_loading_store() still needed after this patch? Should it be
> > > > calling security_kernel_load_data() instead?
> > >
> > > That's up to Kees to decide as he added that hook, and knows
> > > what LSMs may be doing with it. From my perspective it is confusing
> > > to have that hook there so I think it could be removed now.
> > >
> > > Kees?
> >
> > Commit 6593d92 ("firmware_class: perform new LSM checks") references
> > two methods of loading firmware - filesystem-found firmware and
> > demand-loaded blobs. I assume this call in firmware_loading_store()
> > is the demand-loaded blobs. Does that method still exist? Is it
> > still being used?
>
> Yeah its the stupid sysfs interface. So likely loadpin needs porting
> as you IMA as you did.
In this case, it doesn't look like the call to
security_kernel_post_read_file() should be changed, which means that
all the LSMs and IMA still need to support !file.
Mimi
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com (Mimi Zohar)
To: linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH v4 5/8] ima: based on policy require signed firmware (sysfs fallback)
Date: Fri, 01 Jun 2018 19:04:45 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1527894285.13403.43.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180601224617.GU4511@wotan.suse.de>
On Sat, 2018-06-02 at 00:46 +0200, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 01, 2018 at 06:39:55PM -0400, Mimi Zohar wrote:
> > On Fri, 2018-06-01 at 20:21 +0200, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> > > On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 02:01:57PM -0400, Mimi Zohar wrote:
> > > > Luis, is the security_kernel_post_read_file LSM hook in
> > > > firmware_loading_store() still needed after this patch? Should it be
> > > > calling security_kernel_load_data() instead?
> > >
> > > That's up to Kees to decide as he added that hook, and knows
> > > what LSMs may be doing with it. From my perspective it is confusing
> > > to have that hook there so I think it could be removed now.
> > >
> > > Kees?
> >
> > Commit?6593d92 ("firmware_class: perform new LSM checks") references
> > two methods of loading firmware -??filesystem-found firmware and
> > demand-loaded blobs. ?I assume this call in firmware_loading_store()
> > is the demand-loaded blobs. ?Does that method still exist? ?Is it
> > still being used?
>
> Yeah its the stupid sysfs interface. So likely loadpin needs porting
> as you IMA as you did.
In this case, it doesn't look like the call to
security_kernel_post_read_file() should be changed, which means that
all the LSMs and IMA still need to support !file.
?
Mimi
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-security-module" in
the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org,
linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
Eric Biederman <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
kexec@lists.infradead.org, Andres Rodriguez <andresx7@gmail.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>,
Matthew Garrett <mjg59@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 5/8] ima: based on policy require signed firmware (sysfs fallback)
Date: Fri, 01 Jun 2018 19:04:45 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1527894285.13403.43.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180601224617.GU4511@wotan.suse.de>
On Sat, 2018-06-02 at 00:46 +0200, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 01, 2018 at 06:39:55PM -0400, Mimi Zohar wrote:
> > On Fri, 2018-06-01 at 20:21 +0200, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> > > On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 02:01:57PM -0400, Mimi Zohar wrote:
> > > > Luis, is the security_kernel_post_read_file LSM hook in
> > > > firmware_loading_store() still needed after this patch? Should it be
> > > > calling security_kernel_load_data() instead?
> > >
> > > That's up to Kees to decide as he added that hook, and knows
> > > what LSMs may be doing with it. From my perspective it is confusing
> > > to have that hook there so I think it could be removed now.
> > >
> > > Kees?
> >
> > Commit 6593d92 ("firmware_class: perform new LSM checks") references
> > two methods of loading firmware - filesystem-found firmware and
> > demand-loaded blobs. I assume this call in firmware_loading_store()
> > is the demand-loaded blobs. Does that method still exist? Is it
> > still being used?
>
> Yeah its the stupid sysfs interface. So likely loadpin needs porting
> as you IMA as you did.
In this case, it doesn't look like the call to
security_kernel_post_read_file() should be changed, which means that
all the LSMs and IMA still need to support !file.
Mimi
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@kernel.org>
Cc: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
kexec@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Matthew Garrett <mjg59@google.com>,
David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org,
Eric Biederman <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org,
Andres Rodriguez <andresx7@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 5/8] ima: based on policy require signed firmware (sysfs fallback)
Date: Fri, 01 Jun 2018 19:04:45 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1527894285.13403.43.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180601224617.GU4511@wotan.suse.de>
On Sat, 2018-06-02 at 00:46 +0200, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 01, 2018 at 06:39:55PM -0400, Mimi Zohar wrote:
> > On Fri, 2018-06-01 at 20:21 +0200, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> > > On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 02:01:57PM -0400, Mimi Zohar wrote:
> > > > Luis, is the security_kernel_post_read_file LSM hook in
> > > > firmware_loading_store() still needed after this patch? Should it be
> > > > calling security_kernel_load_data() instead?
> > >
> > > That's up to Kees to decide as he added that hook, and knows
> > > what LSMs may be doing with it. From my perspective it is confusing
> > > to have that hook there so I think it could be removed now.
> > >
> > > Kees?
> >
> > Commit 6593d92 ("firmware_class: perform new LSM checks") references
> > two methods of loading firmware - filesystem-found firmware and
> > demand-loaded blobs. I assume this call in firmware_loading_store()
> > is the demand-loaded blobs. Does that method still exist? Is it
> > still being used?
>
> Yeah its the stupid sysfs interface. So likely loadpin needs porting
> as you IMA as you did.
In this case, it doesn't look like the call to
security_kernel_post_read_file() should be changed, which means that
all the LSMs and IMA still need to support !file.
Mimi
_______________________________________________
kexec mailing list
kexec@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-06-01 23:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 139+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-05-29 18:01 [PATCH v4 0/8] kexec/firmware: support system wide policy requiring signatures Mimi Zohar
2018-05-29 18:01 ` Mimi Zohar
2018-05-29 18:01 ` Mimi Zohar
2018-05-29 18:01 ` [PATCH v4 1/8] security: define new LSM hook named security_kernel_load_data Mimi Zohar
2018-05-29 18:01 ` Mimi Zohar
2018-05-29 18:01 ` Mimi Zohar
2018-06-04 19:59 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2018-06-04 19:59 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2018-06-04 19:59 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2018-05-29 18:01 ` [PATCH v4 2/8] kexec: add call to LSM hook in original kexec_load syscall Mimi Zohar
2018-05-29 18:01 ` Mimi Zohar
2018-05-29 18:01 ` Mimi Zohar
2018-06-04 20:00 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2018-06-04 20:00 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2018-06-04 20:00 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2018-05-29 18:01 ` [PATCH v4 3/8] ima: based on policy require signed kexec kernel images Mimi Zohar
2018-05-29 18:01 ` Mimi Zohar
2018-05-29 18:01 ` Mimi Zohar
2018-05-29 18:01 ` [PATCH v4 4/8] firmware: add call to LSM hook before firmware sysfs fallback Mimi Zohar
2018-05-29 18:01 ` Mimi Zohar
2018-05-29 18:01 ` Mimi Zohar
2018-06-01 18:19 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2018-06-01 18:19 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2018-06-01 18:19 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2018-05-29 18:01 ` [PATCH v4 5/8] ima: based on policy require signed firmware (sysfs fallback) Mimi Zohar
2018-05-29 18:01 ` Mimi Zohar
2018-05-29 18:01 ` Mimi Zohar
2018-06-01 18:21 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2018-06-01 18:21 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2018-06-01 18:21 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2018-06-01 22:39 ` Mimi Zohar
2018-06-01 22:39 ` Mimi Zohar
2018-06-01 22:39 ` Mimi Zohar
2018-06-01 22:39 ` Mimi Zohar
2018-06-01 22:46 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2018-06-01 22:46 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2018-06-01 22:46 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2018-06-01 22:46 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2018-06-01 23:04 ` Mimi Zohar [this message]
2018-06-01 23:04 ` Mimi Zohar
2018-06-01 23:04 ` Mimi Zohar
2018-06-01 23:04 ` Mimi Zohar
2018-05-29 18:01 ` [PATCH v4 6/8] ima: add build time policy Mimi Zohar
2018-05-29 18:01 ` Mimi Zohar
2018-05-29 18:01 ` Mimi Zohar
2018-05-29 18:01 ` [RFC PATCH v4 7/8] ima: based on policy prevent loading firmware (pre-allocated buffer) Mimi Zohar
2018-05-29 18:01 ` Mimi Zohar
2018-05-29 18:01 ` Mimi Zohar
2018-06-01 19:15 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2018-06-01 19:15 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2018-06-01 19:15 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2018-06-01 19:25 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2018-06-01 19:25 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2018-06-01 19:25 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2018-06-05 22:37 ` Kees Cook
2018-06-05 22:37 ` Kees Cook
2018-06-05 22:37 ` Kees Cook
2018-06-06 6:20 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2018-06-06 6:20 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2018-06-06 6:20 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2018-06-06 22:06 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2018-06-06 22:06 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2018-06-06 22:06 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2018-05-29 18:02 ` [PATCH v4 8/8] module: replace the existing LSM hook in init_module Mimi Zohar
2018-05-29 18:02 ` Mimi Zohar
2018-05-29 18:02 ` Mimi Zohar
2018-05-29 22:39 ` Paul Moore
2018-05-29 22:39 ` Paul Moore
2018-05-29 22:39 ` Paul Moore
2018-05-29 23:14 ` Mimi Zohar
2018-05-29 23:14 ` Mimi Zohar
2018-05-29 23:14 ` Mimi Zohar
2018-05-29 23:14 ` Mimi Zohar
2018-05-30 21:00 ` Paul Moore
2018-05-30 21:00 ` Paul Moore
2018-05-30 21:00 ` Paul Moore
2018-05-31 15:23 ` [PATCH v4a " Mimi Zohar
2018-05-31 15:23 ` Mimi Zohar
2018-05-31 15:23 ` Mimi Zohar
2018-06-01 22:28 ` Paul Moore
2018-06-01 22:28 ` Paul Moore
2018-06-01 22:28 ` Paul Moore
2018-06-04 9:19 ` Jessica Yu
2018-06-04 9:19 ` Jessica Yu
2018-06-04 9:19 ` Jessica Yu
2018-06-05 19:45 ` Kees Cook
2018-06-05 19:45 ` Kees Cook
2018-06-05 19:45 ` Kees Cook
2018-06-05 21:35 ` Mimi Zohar
2018-06-05 21:35 ` Mimi Zohar
2018-06-05 21:35 ` Mimi Zohar
2018-06-05 21:35 ` Mimi Zohar
2018-06-05 22:26 ` Kees Cook
2018-06-05 22:26 ` Kees Cook
2018-06-05 22:26 ` Kees Cook
2018-06-05 22:40 ` Mimi Zohar
2018-06-05 22:40 ` Mimi Zohar
2018-06-05 22:40 ` Mimi Zohar
2018-06-05 22:40 ` Mimi Zohar
2018-05-29 23:25 ` [PATCH v4 " Mimi Zohar
2018-05-29 23:25 ` Mimi Zohar
2018-05-29 23:25 ` Mimi Zohar
2018-05-29 23:25 ` Mimi Zohar
2018-05-30 2:25 ` Eric W. Biederman
2018-05-30 2:25 ` Eric W. Biederman
2018-05-30 2:25 ` Eric W. Biederman
2018-05-30 21:09 ` Paul Moore
2018-05-30 21:09 ` Paul Moore
2018-05-30 21:09 ` Paul Moore
2018-06-04 14:03 ` [PATCH v4 0/8] kexec/firmware: support system wide policy requiring signatures Mimi Zohar
2018-06-04 14:03 ` Mimi Zohar
2018-06-04 14:03 ` Mimi Zohar
2018-06-04 14:03 ` Mimi Zohar
2018-06-04 19:32 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2018-06-04 19:32 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2018-06-04 19:32 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2018-06-04 19:32 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2018-06-04 19:53 ` Mimi Zohar
2018-06-04 19:53 ` Mimi Zohar
2018-06-04 19:53 ` Mimi Zohar
2018-06-04 19:53 ` Mimi Zohar
2018-06-04 22:03 ` Kees Cook
2018-06-04 22:03 ` Kees Cook
2018-06-04 22:03 ` Kees Cook
2018-06-05 4:09 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2018-06-05 4:09 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2018-06-05 4:09 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2018-06-05 12:19 ` Kees Cook
2018-06-05 12:19 ` Kees Cook
2018-06-05 12:19 ` Kees Cook
2018-06-05 13:25 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2018-06-05 13:25 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2018-06-05 13:25 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2018-06-05 13:43 ` Kees Cook
2018-06-05 13:43 ` Kees Cook
2018-06-05 13:43 ` Kees Cook
2018-06-05 14:05 ` Mimi Zohar
2018-06-05 14:05 ` Mimi Zohar
2018-06-05 14:05 ` 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=1527894285.13403.43.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=andresx7@gmail.com \
--cc=ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=kexec@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mcgrof@kernel.org \
--cc=mjg59@google.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.