From: Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com>
To: Lakshmi Ramasubramanian <nramas@linux.microsoft.com>,
sgrubb@redhat.com, paul@paul-moore.com
Cc: rgb@redhat.com, linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org,
linux-audit@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] IMA: Add audit log for failure conditions
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2020 16:23:51 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1591993431.11061.116.camel@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200611000400.3771-2-nramas@linux.microsoft.com>
Hi Lakshmi,
I haven't yet tested the patch. Below are a couple of comments.
On Wed, 2020-06-10 at 17:04 -0700, Lakshmi Ramasubramanian wrote:
> The final log statement in process_buffer_measurement() for failure
> condition is at debug level. This does not log the message unless
> the system log level is raised which would significantly increase
> the messages in the system log. Change this to an audit message to
> audit integrity failures with the "op" field of the audit message
> set to indicate the measurement operation that failed.
The problem with the existing "pr" level is kind of irrelevant. You
could keep the existing pr_debug() statement, if you wanted to. The
reason for auditing a failure is because it is "integrity" relevant or
more generically "security" relevant. The first patch addresses the
change in the audit message format.
>
> Also, add an audit message for failures in ima_alloc_key_entry().
>
> Sample audit messages:
>
> [ 6.284329] audit: type=1804 audit(1591756723.627:2): pid=1 uid=0
> auid=4294967295 ses=4294967295 subj=kernel
> op=measuring_kexec_cmdline cause=alloc_entry errno=-12
> comm="swapper/0" name="kexec-cmdline" res=0
>
> [ 8.017126] audit: type=1804 audit(1591756725.360:10): pid=1
> uid=0 auid=4294967295 ses=4294967295
> subj=system_u:system_r:init_t:s0 op=measuring_key
> cause=hashing_error errno=-22 comm="systemd"
> name=".builtin_trusted_keys" res=0
>
> Signed-off-by: Lakshmi Ramasubramanian <nramas@linux.microsoft.com>
> Suggested-by: Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com>
> ---
> security/integrity/ima/ima.h | 48 ++++++++++++++++---------
> security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c | 18 +++++++---
> security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c | 2 +-
> security/integrity/ima/ima_queue_keys.c | 5 +++
> 4 files changed, 51 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima.h b/security/integrity/ima/ima.h
> index df93ac258e01..e42101eebd69 100644
> --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima.h
> +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima.h
> @@ -186,27 +186,43 @@ static inline unsigned int ima_hash_key(u8 *digest)
> return (digest[0] | digest[1] << 8) % IMA_MEASURE_HTABLE_SIZE;
> }
>
> -#define __ima_hooks(hook) \
> - hook(NONE) \
> - hook(FILE_CHECK) \
> - hook(MMAP_CHECK) \
> - hook(BPRM_CHECK) \
> - hook(CREDS_CHECK) \
> - hook(POST_SETATTR) \
> - hook(MODULE_CHECK) \
> - hook(FIRMWARE_CHECK) \
> - hook(KEXEC_KERNEL_CHECK) \
> - hook(KEXEC_INITRAMFS_CHECK) \
> - hook(POLICY_CHECK) \
> - hook(KEXEC_CMDLINE) \
> - hook(KEY_CHECK) \
> - hook(MAX_CHECK)
> -#define __ima_hook_enumify(ENUM) ENUM,
> +#define __ima_hooks(hook) \
> + hook(NONE, none) \
> + hook(FILE_CHECK, file) \
> + hook(MMAP_CHECK, mmap) \
> + hook(BPRM_CHECK, bprm) \
> + hook(CREDS_CHECK, creds) \
> + hook(POST_SETATTR, post_setattr) \
> + hook(MODULE_CHECK, module) \
> + hook(FIRMWARE_CHECK, firmware) \
> + hook(KEXEC_KERNEL_CHECK, kexec_kernel) \
> + hook(KEXEC_INITRAMFS_CHECK, kexec_initramfs) \
> + hook(POLICY_CHECK, policy) \
> + hook(KEXEC_CMDLINE, kexec_cmdline) \
> + hook(KEY_CHECK, key) \
> + hook(MAX_CHECK, none)
> +
> +#define __ima_hook_enumify(ENUM, str) ENUM,
> +#define __ima_stringify(arg) (#arg)
> +#define __ima_hook_measuring_stringify(ENUM, str) \
> + (__ima_stringify(measuring_ ##str)),
>
> enum ima_hooks {
> __ima_hooks(__ima_hook_enumify)
> };
>
> +static const char * const ima_hooks_measure_str[] = {
> + __ima_hooks(__ima_hook_measuring_stringify)
> +};
> +
> +static inline const char *ima_hooks_func_measure_str(enum ima_hooks func)
"ima_hooks_func_measure_str" is a bit long. There's no reason for
having both "hooks" and "func" in the name. Also this is a static
function, so it doesn't really need to be prefixed with "ima_". Maybe
truncate it to "func_measure_str()", similar to "func_token".
Mimi
> +{
> + if (func >= MAX_CHECK)
> + return ima_hooks_measure_str[NONE];
> +
> + return ima_hooks_measure_str[func];
> +}
> +
> extern const char *const func_tokens[];
--
Linux-audit mailing list
Linux-audit@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-audit
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-06-15 13:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-06-11 0:03 [PATCH 1/2] integrity: Add errno field in audit message Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2020-06-11 0:04 ` [PATCH 2/2] IMA: Add audit log for failure conditions Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2020-06-12 20:23 ` Mimi Zohar [this message]
2020-06-11 1:45 ` [PATCH 1/2] integrity: Add errno field in audit message Paul Moore
2020-06-11 1:58 ` Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2020-06-11 2:19 ` Paul Moore
2020-06-12 19:25 ` Mimi Zohar
2020-06-12 19:50 ` Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2020-06-15 22:23 ` Steve Grubb
2020-06-15 22:58 ` Paul Moore
2020-06-16 15:29 ` Steve Grubb
2020-06-16 15:43 ` Lakshmi Ramasubramanian
2020-06-16 15:55 ` Steve Grubb
2020-06-16 19:53 ` Mimi Zohar
2020-06-16 20:28 ` Steve Grubb
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=1591993431.11061.116.camel@linux.ibm.com \
--to=zohar@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-audit@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nramas@linux.microsoft.com \
--cc=paul@paul-moore.com \
--cc=rgb@redhat.com \
--cc=sgrubb@redhat.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).