From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A07FC433E1 for ; Sun, 2 Aug 2020 18:42:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com (us-smtp-1.mimecast.com [207.211.31.81]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DD48A2075B for ; Sun, 2 Aug 2020 18:42:05 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=hansenpartnership.com header.i=@hansenpartnership.com header.b="FAJShkAZ"; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=hansenpartnership.com header.i=@hansenpartnership.com header.b="FAJShkAZ" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org DD48A2075B Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=hansenpartnership.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux-audit-bounces@redhat.com Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-481-qzu6UirsNRCshgRqX2aA_w-1; Sun, 02 Aug 2020 14:42:03 -0400 X-MC-Unique: qzu6UirsNRCshgRqX2aA_w-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx07.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.22]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A0A2B1DE1; Sun, 2 Aug 2020 18:41:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from colo-mx.corp.redhat.com (colo-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.21]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 894201001B0B; Sun, 2 Aug 2020 18:41:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists01.pubmisc.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com (lists01.pubmisc.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.19.33]) by colo-mx.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 66C589A0E1; Sun, 2 Aug 2020 18:41:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx04.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.4]) by lists01.pubmisc.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id 072GrhWK032408 for ; Sun, 2 Aug 2020 12:53:43 -0400 Received: by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) id 0CB502029F60; Sun, 2 Aug 2020 16:53:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (mimecast01.extmail.prod.ext.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.55.17]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 07C082026D67 for ; Sun, 2 Aug 2020 16:53:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from us-smtp-1.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com [207.211.31.120]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D773B87E8F9 for ; Sun, 2 Aug 2020 16:53:40 +0000 (UTC) ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=dkim.mimecast.com; s=201903; t=1596387220; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:dkim-signature; bh=meqw8ehrrkd/PjvY4AKkmxiknD5SI4QvtSTtX+CnDIM=; b=qiZL9/uksU0YOAIHUAX3Pn57o8q3yfHDAOunZoXH/Ef9VNhmCNQGC1APhTtTxOP9/b4Umv 8cM1/hFEuVej5d63l7SAXD1EU2ZMg8CW3vYMLxM50iH4lpwrlPr6kSpXIYFISLFErvIzau rw74q8j6x+5cZ/ItpY/pz9jfxKtUHp9xpzWM3cQ8hjrIZJnBRHFUXjhFmY/jx8MGyphBEx Ppv9f9YgxKdKJ+M0Hy4RylPeE2oEAy1Hj5CzgGj3droX26kzuEcdZiyFcDRctCirJrpz5a xbqgRelzj9nASPVaTFW9ixvM40nhc6Bgx7IX26jmFbkdvd2H1aL9oY91g8TVKw== ARC-Seal: i=1; s=201903; d=dkim.mimecast.com; t=1596387220; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=oxuYxJl3RnfLj0hxUlhoK2kgk2ySxntxf03cZQA1wOkkre16HjPO1XkcbbGL7MR1aUbMiJ DP4YwfWFxcN26pfjmvVLExXj7QLd7FKDeJ9nzw4FQt17a/0kXadWsCWUBRjKfAFGCIz+yG Aj2wx9WvG9bByG/sBlYIiKR6tlaLvaf/qW4vfByOzKo+VXNRf76Tw0JGrYSYTj1qJQb5Ph 1CjUeD0sbuHLghtPOAacz7uwqjzH1O8GZLmoLGbRC99y/5PGALN0TkMqTKJL2UNE5gQ07X yDsNzVHkFTbfxIxh8KL0Wkw//8JJsBIJBPLKmqkYxbfDiL/fuXwlUNe+pCiilg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; relay.mimecast.com; dkim=pass header.d=hansenpartnership.com header.s=20151216 header.b=FAJShkAZ; dkim=pass header.d=hansenpartnership.com header.s=20151216 header.b=FAJShkAZ; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=HansenPartnership.com; spf=pass (relay.mimecast.com: domain of james.bottomley@hansenpartnership.com designates 66.63.167.143 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=james.bottomley@hansenpartnership.com Received: from bedivere.hansenpartnership.com (bedivere.hansenpartnership.com [66.63.167.143]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-391-J73k0OmOP2SYbaKuXg6zvw-1; Sun, 02 Aug 2020 12:53:36 -0400 X-MC-Unique: J73k0OmOP2SYbaKuXg6zvw-1 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by bedivere.hansenpartnership.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 885DB8EE1D9; Sun, 2 Aug 2020 09:43:29 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=hansenpartnership.com; s=20151216; t=1596386609; bh=oOhMZH0FB4G6orqdqFAkNZTXeB04XgPNUsm8TD4axsQ=; h=Subject:From:To:Cc:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=FAJShkAZZYyORIkhrqfSw8BqDSP8QlmrngZQFw4ROTqB3PQ+G9V8iksNfVUVn74Xj +x8faujRDzZNkaOa4js3O4QsNJo03gHhpNQ1OkoSSrlN9lKDbK5hALrRjPbs1fIY6m l1nRpnp3y5eFE5YVTo1Os2MZ6mCFp1ZXz0qKGUoI= Received: from bedivere.hansenpartnership.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (bedivere.hansenpartnership.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id bIfAAv72tOKa; Sun, 2 Aug 2020 09:43:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [153.66.254.194] (unknown [50.35.76.230]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by bedivere.hansenpartnership.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2357D8EE16A; Sun, 2 Aug 2020 09:43:28 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=hansenpartnership.com; s=20151216; t=1596386609; bh=oOhMZH0FB4G6orqdqFAkNZTXeB04XgPNUsm8TD4axsQ=; h=Subject:From:To:Cc:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=FAJShkAZZYyORIkhrqfSw8BqDSP8QlmrngZQFw4ROTqB3PQ+G9V8iksNfVUVn74Xj +x8faujRDzZNkaOa4js3O4QsNJo03gHhpNQ1OkoSSrlN9lKDbK5hALrRjPbs1fIY6m l1nRpnp3y5eFE5YVTo1Os2MZ6mCFp1ZXz0qKGUoI= Message-ID: <1596386606.4087.20.camel@HansenPartnership.com> Subject: Re: [dm-devel] [RFC PATCH v5 00/11] Integrity Policy Enforcement LSM (IPE) From: James Bottomley To: Pavel Machek , Sasha Levin Date: Sun, 02 Aug 2020 09:43:26 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20200802143143.GB20261@amd> References: <20200728213614.586312-1-deven.desai@linux.microsoft.com> <20200802115545.GA1162@bug> <20200802140300.GA2975990@sasha-vm> <20200802143143.GB20261@amd> Mime-Version: 1.0 Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; dkim=pass header.d=hansenpartnership.com header.s=20151216 header.b=FAJShkAZ; dkim=pass header.d=hansenpartnership.com header.s=20151216 header.b=FAJShkAZ; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=HansenPartnership.com; spf=pass (relay.mimecast.com: domain of james.bottomley@hansenpartnership.com designates 66.63.167.143 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=james.bottomley@hansenpartnership.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Impersonation-Protect: Policy=CLT - Impersonation Protection Definition; Similar Internal Domain=false; Similar Monitored External Domain=false; Custom External Domain=false; Mimecast External Domain=false; Newly Observed Domain=false; Internal User Name=false; Custom Display Name List=false; Reply-to Address Mismatch=false; Targeted Threat Dictionary=false; Mimecast Threat Dictionary=false; Custom Threat Dictionary=false; X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.78 on 10.11.54.4 X-loop: linux-audit@redhat.com X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sun, 02 Aug 2020 14:41:38 -0400 Cc: snitzer@redhat.com, Deven Bowers , zohar@linux.ibm.com, dm-devel@redhat.com, tyhicks@linux.microsoft.com, agk@redhat.com, corbet@lwn.net, jmorris@namei.org, nramas@linux.microsoft.com, serge@hallyn.com, pasha.tatashin@soleen.com, jannh@google.com, linux-block@vger.kernel.org, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, axboe@kernel.dk, mdsakib@microsoft.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, linux-audit@redhat.com, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org, jaskarankhurana@linux.microsoft.com X-BeenThere: linux-audit@redhat.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: junk List-Id: Linux Audit Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============6310532748118711004==" Sender: linux-audit-bounces@redhat.com Errors-To: linux-audit-bounces@redhat.com X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.84 on 10.5.11.22 --===============6310532748118711004== Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-MrVpu3P/x22sFTzai/hX" --=-MrVpu3P/x22sFTzai/hX Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, 2020-08-02 at 16:31 +0200, Pavel Machek wrote: > On Sun 2020-08-02 10:03:00, Sasha Levin wrote: > > On Sun, Aug 02, 2020 at 01:55:45PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote: > > > Hi! > > >=20 > > > > IPE is a Linux Security Module which allows for a configurable > > > > policy to enforce integrity requirements on the whole system. > > > > It attempts to solve the issue of Code Integrity: that any code > > > > being executed (or files being read), are identical to the > > > > version that was built by a trusted source. > > >=20 > > > How is that different from security/integrity/ima? > >=20 > > Maybe if you would have read the cover letter all the way down to > > the 5th paragraph which explains how IPE is different from IMA we > > could avoided this mail exchange... >=20 > " > IPE differs from other LSMs which provide integrity checking (for > instance, > IMA), as it has no dependency on the filesystem metadata itself. The > attributes that IPE checks are deterministic properties that exist > solely > in the kernel. Additionally, IPE provides no additional mechanisms of > verifying these files (e.g. IMA Signatures) - all of the attributes > of > verifying files are existing features within the kernel, such as > dm-verity > or fsverity. > " >=20 > That is not really helpful. I think what the above is trying to to is to expose is an IMA limitation that the new LSM fixes. I think what it meant to say is that IMA uses xattrs to store the signature data which is the "metadata dependency". However, it overlooks the fact that IMA can use appended signatures as well, which have no metadata dependency, so I'm not sure I've helped you understand why this is different from IMA. Perhaps a more convincing argument is that IMA hooks into various filesystem "gates" to perform integrity checks (file read and file execute being the most obvious). This LSM wants additional gates within device mapper itself that IMA currently doesn't hook into. Perhaps the big question is: If we used the existing IMA appended signature for detached signatures (effectively becoming the "properties" referred to in the cover letter) and hooked IMA into device mapper using additional policy terms, would that satisfy all the requirements this new LSM has? James --=-MrVpu3P/x22sFTzai/hX Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iHUEABMIAB0WIQTnYEDbdso9F2cI+arnQslM7pishQUCXybtLgAKCRDnQslM7pis hWimAP9T9I/4sBSeBrGI7NqoyKwG2H+cwtXr/XrBRxwSXraDUgD/TFHreLGqN12U JeJ3dF9i/fLU2fxGJpJrexE3/T8J3AQ= =Q5Lc -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-MrVpu3P/x22sFTzai/hX-- --===============6310532748118711004== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline -- Linux-audit mailing list Linux-audit@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-audit --===============6310532748118711004==--