archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tushar Sugandhi <>
To: Thore Sommer <>
Subject: Re: [dm-devel] [PATCH 0/7] device mapper target measurements using IMA
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2021 12:24:18 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <>

Hi Thore,
Replying to a few questions which were not already answered by me/Alasdair.

On 7/27/21 3:18 AM, Thore Sommer wrote:

> There is no way to verify if the root hash was verified against a signature. We
> have "root_hash_sig_key_desc SIGNATURE_DESCRIPTION" in the dm table.
> "SIGNATURE_DESCRIPTION" itself is not really useful because it seems that we
> cannot map it back to the certificate that was used for verification but the
> presence of "root_hash_sig_key_desc" might be enough in combination with
> measuring the keyring.

Thanks for the suggestion Thore.
I can update the verity_status() to measure if v->signature_key_desc is 

Something like:
DMEMIT("signature_key_desc_present=%c,", v->signature_key_desc ? 'y' :

Alasdair, Mike,
Can you tell if this is needed and/or sufficient?
If it is needed, should we log the full string  v->signature_key_desc?
I am concerned about logging the full string as it is an unbounded
buffer (a char*) coming from UM. And at the same time, not sure if just
logging the presence is sufficient. Thoughts?

Please note – even if we measure signature_key_desc (full string or just
its presence): in order to use it with the keyrings, the IMA policy also
needs to be set to measure key rings (using “measure func=KEY_CHECK
...”). It is independent from measuring the device mapper data (which is
measured when the policy is set to “measure func=CRITICAL_DATA
label=device-mapper ...”).

Therefore measuring keyrings together (i.e. in the same IMA log) with DM
data  is not always guaranteed, since it is dictated by how the IMA
policy is configured.

Just FYI.

> For remote attestation services it would be nice if we have clear indicator from
> what component the "ima-buf" entry was generated. Prefixing all "n-ng" field
> entries with something like "dm_" would make it easier for us to add different
> validators for different measurements that use the "ima-buf" template. The
> keyring measurements already use "ima-buf" and using some kind of naming scheme
> to easily differentiate the entries would be nice.
The event names typically come from kernel components that are doing the
measurement of critical data. So any duplicates should be caught in the
upstream review of the kernel patch.

But thanks for the suggestion. I will prefix the event names in this 
patch series with “dm_” to indicate they are related to device mapper.

> Regards,
> Thore

  parent reply	other threads:[~2021-07-29 19:24 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-07-13  0:48 Tushar Sugandhi
2021-07-13  0:48 ` [PATCH 1/7] dm: measure data on table load Tushar Sugandhi
2021-07-21  2:12   ` Mimi Zohar
2021-07-21 15:42     ` Mike Snitzer
2021-07-21 16:07       ` Mimi Zohar
2021-07-21 21:17         ` Mimi Zohar
2021-07-29 19:58           ` Tushar Sugandhi
2021-07-13  0:48 ` [PATCH 2/7] dm: measure data on device resume Tushar Sugandhi
2021-07-13  0:49 ` [PATCH 3/7] dm: measure data on device remove Tushar Sugandhi
2021-07-13  0:49 ` [PATCH 4/7] dm: measure data on table clear Tushar Sugandhi
2021-07-13  0:49 ` [PATCH 5/7] dm: measure data on device rename Tushar Sugandhi
2021-07-13  0:49 ` [PATCH 6/7] dm: update target specific status functions to measure data Tushar Sugandhi
2021-07-13  1:06   ` Alasdair G Kergon
2021-07-14 20:23     ` Tushar Sugandhi
2021-07-13  0:49 ` [PATCH 7/7] dm: add documentation for IMA measurement support Tushar Sugandhi
2021-07-21  2:33   ` Mimi Zohar
2021-07-24  7:25     ` Tushar Sugandhi
2021-07-26 16:33       ` Mimi Zohar
2021-07-26 18:28         ` Tushar Sugandhi
2021-07-14 11:32 ` [dm-devel] [PATCH 0/7] device mapper target measurements using IMA Thore Sommer
2021-07-14 20:20   ` Tushar Sugandhi
2021-07-27 10:18     ` Thore Sommer
2021-07-27 20:33       ` Alasdair G Kergon
2021-07-28  3:10         ` Tushar Sugandhi
2021-07-28 17:14           ` Thore Sommer
2021-07-29 17:32             ` Tushar Sugandhi
2021-07-28 17:34         ` Thore Sommer
2021-07-28 21:33       ` Alasdair G Kergon
2021-08-02 10:45         ` Thore Sommer
2021-07-29 19:24       ` Tushar Sugandhi [this message]
2021-08-02 10:38         ` Thore Sommer
2021-07-20 21:27 ` Mike Snitzer

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:

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \
    --subject='Re: [dm-devel] [PATCH 0/7] device mapper target measurements using IMA' \

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

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).