From: Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore.com>
To: Fan Wu <wufan@linux.microsoft.com>
Cc: axboe@kernel.dk, linux-block@vger.kernel.org, tytso@mit.edu,
dm-devel@redhat.com, corbet@lwn.net, roberto.sassu@huawei.com,
Deven Bowers <deven.desai@linux.microsoft.com>,
linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, snitzer@kernel.org, jmorris@namei.org,
zohar@linux.ibm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
ebiggers@kernel.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org,
linux-audit@redhat.com, eparis@redhat.com,
linux-fscrypt@vger.kernel.org, linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org,
agk@redhat.com, serge@hallyn.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v9 05/16] ipe: add userspace interface
Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2023 17:45:41 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAHC9VhQDvWDshaZvJrHmjcwyHFxv9oYTN9bn0xiTtFZQRp+GPg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230410191035.GB18827@linuxonhyperv3.guj3yctzbm1etfxqx2vob5hsef.xx.internal.cloudapp.net>
On Mon, Apr 10, 2023 at 3:10 PM Fan Wu <wufan@linux.microsoft.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 02, 2023 at 02:04:42PM -0500, Paul Moore wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 30, 2023 at 5:58???PM Fan Wu <wufan@linux.microsoft.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > From: Deven Bowers <deven.desai@linux.microsoft.com>
> > >
> > > As is typical with LSMs, IPE uses securityfs as its interface with
> > > userspace. for a complete list of the interfaces and the respective
> > > inputs/outputs, please see the documentation under
> > > admin-guide/LSM/ipe.rst
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Deven Bowers <deven.desai@linux.microsoft.com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Fan Wu <wufan@linux.microsoft.com>
> >
> > ...
> >
> > > ---
> > > security/ipe/Makefile | 2 +
> > > security/ipe/fs.c | 101 +++++++++
> > > security/ipe/fs.h | 17 ++
> > > security/ipe/ipe.c | 3 +
> > > security/ipe/ipe.h | 2 +
> > > security/ipe/policy.c | 135 ++++++++++++
> > > security/ipe/policy.h | 7 +
> > > security/ipe/policy_fs.c | 459 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > 8 files changed, 726 insertions(+)
> > > create mode 100644 security/ipe/fs.c
> > > create mode 100644 security/ipe/fs.h
> > > create mode 100644 security/ipe/policy_fs.c
...
> > > +/**
> > > + * ipe_update_policy - parse a new policy and replace @old with it.
> > > + * @addr: Supplies a pointer to the i_private for saving policy.
> > > + * @text: Supplies a pointer to the plain text policy.
> > > + * @textlen: Supplies the length of @text.
> > > + * @pkcs7: Supplies a pointer to a buffer containing a pkcs7 message.
> > > + * @pkcs7len: Supplies the length of @pkcs7len.
> > > + *
> > > + * @text/@textlen is mutually exclusive with @pkcs7/@pkcs7len - see
> > > + * ipe_new_policy.
> > > + *
> > > + * Return:
> > > + * * !IS_ERR - OK
> > > + * * -ENOENT - Policy doesn't exist
> > > + * * -EINVAL - New policy is invalid
> > > + */
> > > +struct ipe_policy *ipe_update_policy(struct ipe_policy __rcu **addr,
> > > + const char *text, size_t textlen,
> > > + const char *pkcs7, size_t pkcs7len)
> > > +{
> > > + int rc = 0;
> > > + struct ipe_policy *old, *new;
> > > +
> > > + old = ipe_get_policy_rcu(*addr);
> > > + if (!old) {
> > > + rc = -ENOENT;
> > > + goto err;
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > + new = ipe_new_policy(text, textlen, pkcs7, pkcs7len);
> > > + if (IS_ERR(new)) {
> > > + rc = PTR_ERR(new);
> > > + goto err;
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > + if (strcmp(new->parsed->name, old->parsed->name)) {
> > > + rc = -EINVAL;
> > > + goto err;
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > + if (ver_to_u64(old) > ver_to_u64(new)) {
> > > + rc = -EINVAL;
> > > + goto err;
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > + if (ipe_is_policy_active(old)) {
> >
> > I don't understand the is-active check, you want to make @new the new
> > active policy regardless, right? Could this is-active check ever be
> > false?
>
> Actually this is needed. Policy updates can be applied to any deployed
> policy, which may be saved in two places: the securityfs file node
> and the ipe_active_policy pointer. To update a policy, this function first
> checks if the policy saved in the securityfs file node is currently active.
> If so, it updates the ipe_active_policy pointer to point to the new policy,
> and finally updates the policy pointer in the securityfs to the new policy.
Ah, okay. I must have forgotten, or not realized, that multiple
policies could be loaded and not active.
I guess this does make me wonder about keeping a non-active policy
loaded in the kernel, what purpose does that serve?
--
paul-moore.com
--
Linux-audit mailing list
Linux-audit@redhat.com
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-audit
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-04-12 12:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 74+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-01-30 22:57 [RFC PATCH v9 00/16] Integrity Policy Enforcement LSM (IPE) Fan Wu
2023-01-30 22:57 ` [RFC PATCH v9 01/16] security: add ipe lsm Fan Wu
2023-03-02 19:00 ` Paul Moore
2023-04-06 19:20 ` Fan Wu
2023-01-30 22:57 ` [RFC PATCH v9 02/16] ipe: add policy parser Fan Wu
2023-01-31 10:53 ` Roberto Sassu
2023-02-01 22:38 ` Fan Wu
2023-03-02 19:02 ` Paul Moore
2023-04-06 20:00 ` Fan Wu
2023-04-11 19:13 ` Paul Moore
2023-01-30 22:57 ` [RFC PATCH v9 03/16] ipe: add evaluation loop and introduce 'boot_verified' as a trust provider Fan Wu
2023-01-31 10:29 ` Roberto Sassu
2023-01-31 15:49 ` Roberto Sassu
2023-02-10 23:21 ` Fan Wu
2023-03-02 2:33 ` Paul Moore
2023-03-02 19:03 ` Paul Moore
2023-04-10 18:53 ` Fan Wu
2023-04-11 20:32 ` Paul Moore
2023-01-30 22:57 ` [RFC PATCH v9 04/16] security: add new securityfs delete function Fan Wu
2023-01-30 22:57 ` [RFC PATCH v9 05/16] ipe: add userspace interface Fan Wu
2023-01-31 10:49 ` Roberto Sassu
2023-02-01 19:46 ` Fan Wu
2023-03-02 19:04 ` Paul Moore
2023-04-10 19:10 ` Fan Wu
2023-04-11 21:45 ` Paul Moore [this message]
2023-04-12 23:36 ` Fan Wu
2023-04-13 18:45 ` Paul Moore
2023-04-17 18:06 ` Fan Wu
2023-04-17 20:16 ` Paul Moore
2023-04-17 21:18 ` Fan Wu
2023-04-17 21:31 ` Paul Moore
2023-01-30 22:57 ` [RFC PATCH v9 06/16] ipe: add LSM hooks on execution and kernel read Fan Wu
2023-01-31 12:51 ` Roberto Sassu
2023-02-09 22:42 ` Fan Wu
2023-03-02 19:05 ` Paul Moore
2023-04-10 21:22 ` Fan Wu
2023-01-30 22:57 ` [RFC PATCH v9 07/16] uapi|audit|ipe: add ipe auditing support Fan Wu
2023-01-31 12:57 ` Roberto Sassu
2023-01-31 17:10 ` Steve Grubb
2023-03-02 19:05 ` Paul Moore
2023-03-16 22:53 ` Fan Wu
2023-04-11 23:07 ` Paul Moore
2023-04-11 23:21 ` Paul Moore
2023-01-30 22:57 ` [RFC PATCH v9 08/16] ipe: add permissive toggle Fan Wu
2023-03-02 19:06 ` Paul Moore
2023-01-30 22:57 ` [RFC PATCH v9 09/16] block|security: add LSM blob to block_device Fan Wu
2023-01-31 8:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-01-31 23:01 ` Fan Wu
2023-03-02 19:07 ` Paul Moore
2023-01-30 22:57 ` [RFC PATCH v9 10/16] dm-verity: consume root hash digest and signature data via LSM hook Fan Wu
2023-01-31 13:22 ` Roberto Sassu
2023-02-01 23:26 ` Fan Wu
2023-02-02 8:21 ` Roberto Sassu
2023-02-07 23:52 ` Fan Wu
2023-01-30 22:57 ` [RFC PATCH v9 11/16] ipe: add support for dm-verity as a trust provider Fan Wu
2023-03-02 19:08 ` Paul Moore
2023-03-16 22:10 ` Fan Wu
2023-01-30 22:57 ` [RFC PATCH v9 12/16] fsverity: consume builtin signature via LSM hook Fan Wu
2023-02-09 3:30 ` Eric Biggers
2023-02-09 22:21 ` Fan Wu
2023-01-30 22:57 ` [RFC PATCH v9 13/16] ipe: enable support for fs-verity as a trust provider Fan Wu
2023-01-31 14:00 ` Roberto Sassu
2023-02-01 23:50 ` Fan Wu
2023-02-02 9:51 ` Roberto Sassu
2023-02-08 0:16 ` Fan Wu
2023-01-30 22:57 ` [RFC PATCH v9 14/16] scripts: add boot policy generation program Fan Wu
2023-01-30 22:57 ` [RFC PATCH v9 15/16] ipe: kunit test for parser Fan Wu
2023-01-30 22:57 ` [RFC PATCH v9 16/16] documentation: add ipe documentation Fan Wu
2023-01-31 3:59 ` Bagas Sanjaya
2023-02-02 0:19 ` Fan Wu
2023-01-31 14:22 ` [RFC PATCH v9 00/16] Integrity Policy Enforcement LSM (IPE) Roberto Sassu
2023-02-01 0:48 ` Fan Wu
2023-02-02 10:48 ` Roberto Sassu
2023-02-08 0:31 ` Fan Wu
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=CAHC9VhQDvWDshaZvJrHmjcwyHFxv9oYTN9bn0xiTtFZQRp+GPg@mail.gmail.com \
--to=paul@paul-moore.com \
--cc=agk@redhat.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=deven.desai@linux.microsoft.com \
--cc=dm-devel@redhat.com \
--cc=ebiggers@kernel.org \
--cc=eparis@redhat.com \
--cc=jmorris@namei.org \
--cc=linux-audit@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fscrypt@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=roberto.sassu@huawei.com \
--cc=serge@hallyn.com \
--cc=snitzer@kernel.org \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
--cc=wufan@linux.microsoft.com \
--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).