From: Coiby Xu <coxu@redhat.com>
To: Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: kexec@lists.infradead.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
Michal Suchanek <msuchanek@suse.de>, Baoquan He <bhe@redhat.com>,
Dave Young <dyoung@redhat.com>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
"Eric W . Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
Chun-Yi Lee <jlee@suse.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 0/4] use more system keyrings to verify arm64 and s390 kexec kernel image signature
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2022 21:14:55 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220620131455.lo2yzumr6ugmofuw@Rk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <dc23f46380e6fb218181e685ad2f0a1db34500fe.camel@linux.ibm.com>
On Fri, Jun 17, 2022 at 07:58:37AM -0400, Mimi Zohar wrote:
>On Fri, 2022-06-17 at 11:57 +0800, Coiby Xu wrote:
>> >Thanks for explaining IMA to me! There is still the question of what's
>> >the root of trust for .builtin_trusted_keys when there is no real
>> >signature verification. For example, when CONFIG_KEXEC_SIG is enabled,
>> >the default IMA policy is to not appraise kexec image. Since lockdown is
>> >not enabled by default, there is no real verification as
>> >kimage_validate_signature succeeds even when kexec_image_verify_sig
>> >fails.
>>
>> I realize my reasoning is incorrect. Actually the signature
>> verification which establishes the trust on the keys happens in the
>> bootloader. So IMA appraisal or kimage_validate_signature is irrelevant
>> to the question of the root of trust of .builtin_trusted_key. For GRUB,
>> it won't verify the signature by default when secure boot is not enabled.
>> Thus the question of what's root of trust when there is no signature
>> verification is still valid.
>
>We're saying the same thing, just differently. Your wording describes
>secure boot, how it is established, and who/what is responsible for it.
>I don't think those details are needed. I originally said,
I think I'm addressing a different concern or case. If kexec_file_load is going
to verify a kernel image signature, what keys is it going to trust and why? I
believe explaining the root trust for different keyrings is to answer this
question. When a bootloader verifies a kernel image signature, the trust is
based on verification of the kernel image signature which we both agree. But
what if a bootloader doesn't do the verification?
>
>.builtin_trusted_keys:
>
>For example,
>
>Keys may be built into the kernel during build or inserted into memory
>reserved for keys post build. In both of these cases, trust is based
>on verification of the kernel image signature. On a physical system in
>a secure boot environment, this trust is rooted in HW.
>
>The last line should have said, "For example, on a physical system in a
>...".
>
>thanks,
>
>Mimi
>
--
Best regards,
Coiby
_______________________________________________
kexec mailing list
kexec@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-06-20 13:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-05-12 7:01 [PATCH v8 0/4] use more system keyrings to verify arm64 and s390 kexec kernel image signature Coiby Xu
2022-05-12 7:01 ` [PATCH v8 1/4] kexec: clean up arch_kexec_kernel_verify_sig Coiby Xu
2022-06-09 21:57 ` Mimi Zohar
2022-05-12 7:01 ` [PATCH v8 2/4] kexec, KEYS: make the code in bzImage64_verify_sig generic Coiby Xu
2022-05-12 7:21 ` Baoquan He
2022-06-09 22:18 ` Mimi Zohar
2022-06-16 1:47 ` Coiby Xu
2022-05-12 7:01 ` [PATCH v8 3/4] arm64: kexec_file: use more system keyrings to verify kernel image signature Coiby Xu
2022-06-09 23:15 ` Mimi Zohar
2022-06-16 1:22 ` Coiby Xu
2022-06-17 9:34 ` Michal Suchánek
2022-05-12 7:01 ` [PATCH v8 4/4] kexec, KEYS, s390: Make use of built-in and secondary keyring for signature verification Coiby Xu
2022-05-18 11:29 ` Heiko Carstens
2022-05-19 0:39 ` Baoquan He
2022-05-19 11:56 ` Mimi Zohar
2022-05-19 14:22 ` Baoquan He
2022-05-19 17:11 ` Michal =?unknown-8bit?q?Such=C3=A1nek?=
2022-06-16 1:46 ` Coiby Xu
2022-05-20 17:04 ` [PATCH v8 0/4] use more system keyrings to verify arm64 and s390 kexec kernel image signature Mimi Zohar
2022-05-25 9:59 ` Coiby Xu
2022-05-25 13:30 ` Mimi Zohar
2022-05-27 13:43 ` Coiby Xu
2022-05-27 16:45 ` Mimi Zohar
2022-06-16 1:15 ` Coiby Xu
2022-06-17 3:57 ` Coiby Xu
2022-06-17 11:58 ` Mimi Zohar
2022-06-20 13:14 ` Coiby Xu [this message]
2022-06-09 15:35 ` Mimi Zohar
2022-06-16 1:21 ` Coiby Xu
2022-06-17 12:06 ` 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=20220620131455.lo2yzumr6ugmofuw@Rk \
--to=coxu@redhat.com \
--cc=bhe@redhat.com \
--cc=dyoung@redhat.com \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=jlee@suse.com \
--cc=kexec@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=msuchanek@suse.de \
--cc=will@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).