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=-5.5 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_2 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 573D4C433DF for ; Fri, 7 Aug 2020 17:32:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2CC7720866 for ; Fri, 7 Aug 2020 17:32:45 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=ibm.com header.i=@ibm.com header.b="jd8bvtZS" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1725900AbgHGRce (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Aug 2020 13:32:34 -0400 Received: from mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.158.5]:36432 "EHLO mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726015AbgHGRcc (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Aug 2020 13:32:32 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098421.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 077HW45O185756; Fri, 7 Aug 2020 13:32:08 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ibm.com; h=message-id : subject : from : to : cc : date : in-reply-to : references : content-type : mime-version : content-transfer-encoding; s=pp1; bh=Y0pKoWPeTxDyByUmLaCIWxPyH2WwR9p+/RxajWERAWo=; b=jd8bvtZSDyNgHw2Je8MeB+DJ4XXI9Pf45pkFwoUx+CqF1AgoBovcIE+mumIY79vc5bTf ns67M1Y+8W/AAFJVuVwsN1g6c6nDdNKYVu5ajSLIuEn93EDoAhq1n1CS0UncjvpDTClo 5/x4R8oSQrERkaRuVked3eDOR7kBxPGZbecpNpVdtwXsNTH/Z18WO4VIoVhaBhZsNgOH FbdQnOsCLbFjtWEZKnAjCmqvdBLzrhV6OnvzBoLfO+5Pp+EWgl2OmrR0atXyOKhl3zX5 TGxtNZnfzXB0sK9P697OG2ojYwvTemmIMHOC5k/zgGasURdGSMvfxvc6Ucxm81nnQtXC xA== Received: from pps.reinject (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 32repj1gev-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 07 Aug 2020 13:32:07 -0400 Received: from m0098421.ppops.net (m0098421.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by pps.reinject (8.16.0.36/8.16.0.36) with SMTP id 077HW4kl185730; Fri, 7 Aug 2020 13:32:06 -0400 Received: from ppma03fra.de.ibm.com (6b.4a.5195.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [149.81.74.107]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 32repj1g73-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 07 Aug 2020 13:32:06 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (ppma03fra.de.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma03fra.de.ibm.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 077HVYj4008226; Fri, 7 Aug 2020 17:31:34 GMT Received: from b06cxnps4074.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06relay11.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.109.196]) by ppma03fra.de.ibm.com with ESMTP id 32nyyd3e91-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 07 Aug 2020 17:31:34 +0000 Received: from d06av21.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06av21.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.105.232]) by b06cxnps4074.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 077HVVF530343660 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 7 Aug 2020 17:31:31 GMT Received: from d06av21.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id BFFE252050; Fri, 7 Aug 2020 17:31:31 +0000 (GMT) Received: from li-f45666cc-3089-11b2-a85c-c57d1a57929f.ibm.com (unknown [9.160.122.187]) by d06av21.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 004F55204F; Fri, 7 Aug 2020 17:31:27 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: <4a764c86a824a4b931dd7f130ce7afce7df140e4.camel@linux.ibm.com> Subject: Re: [dm-devel] [RFC PATCH v5 00/11] Integrity Policy Enforcement LSM (IPE) From: Mimi Zohar To: James Morris Cc: James Bottomley , Deven Bowers , Pavel Machek , Sasha Levin , snitzer@redhat.com, dm-devel@redhat.com, tyhicks@linux.microsoft.com, agk@redhat.com, paul@paul-moore.com, corbet@lwn.net, 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, eparis@redhat.com, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, linux-audit@redhat.com, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org, jaskarankhurana@linux.microsoft.com Date: Fri, 07 Aug 2020 13:31:27 -0400 In-Reply-To: References: <20200728213614.586312-1-deven.desai@linux.microsoft.com> <20200802115545.GA1162@bug> <20200802140300.GA2975990@sasha-vm> <20200802143143.GB20261@amd> <1596386606.4087.20.camel@HansenPartnership.com> <1596639689.3457.17.camel@HansenPartnership.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-15" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.28.5 (3.28.5-12.el8) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.235,18.0.687 definitions=2020-08-07_15:2020-08-06,2020-08-07 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 bulkscore=0 malwarescore=0 priorityscore=1501 mlxscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 suspectscore=0 adultscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 clxscore=1015 phishscore=0 spamscore=0 impostorscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2006250000 definitions=main-2008070120 Sender: linux-integrity-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org On Sat, 2020-08-08 at 02:41 +1000, James Morris wrote: > On Thu, 6 Aug 2020, Mimi Zohar wrote: > > > On Thu, 2020-08-06 at 09:51 +1000, James Morris wrote: > > > On Wed, 5 Aug 2020, Mimi Zohar wrote: > > > > > > > If block layer integrity was enough, there wouldn't have been a need > > > > for fs-verity. Even fs-verity is limited to read only filesystems, > > > > which makes validating file integrity so much easier. From the > > > > beginning, we've said that fs-verity signatures should be included in > > > > the measurement list. (I thought someone signed on to add that support > > > > to IMA, but have not yet seen anything.) > > > > > > > > Going forward I see a lot of what we've accomplished being incorporated > > > > into the filesystems. When IMA will be limited to defining a system > > > > wide policy, I'll have completed my job. > > > > > > What are your thoughts on IPE being a standalone LSM? Would you prefer to > > > see its functionality integrated into IMA? > > > > Improving the integrity subsystem would be preferred. > > > > Are you planning to attend Plumbers? Perhaps we could propose a BoF > session on this topic. That sounds like a good idea. Mimi