linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Thiago Jung Bauermann <bauerman@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org
Cc: linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, keyrings@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Dmitry Kasatkin <dmitry.kasatkin@gmail.com>,
	James Morris <james.l.morris@oracle.com>,
	"Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@hallyn.com>,
	David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
	David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>,
	Jessica Yu <jeyu@redhat.com>,
	Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>,
	Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	"AKASHI, Takahiro" <takahiro.akashi@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 17/18] ima: Implement support for module-style appended signatures
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2017 09:31:35 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1509456695.3583.226.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20171018005331.2688-18-bauerman@linux.vnet.ibm.com>

On Tue, 2017-10-17 at 22:53 -0200, Thiago Jung Bauermann wrote:

Below are a few additional comments.

> @@ -200,18 +239,28 @@ int ima_read_xattr(struct dentry *dentry,
>   */
>  int ima_appraise_measurement(enum ima_hooks func,
>  			     struct integrity_iint_cache *iint,
> -			     struct file *file, const unsigned char *filename,
> -			     struct evm_ima_xattr_data *xattr_value,
> -			     int xattr_len, int opened)
> +			     struct file *file, const void *buf, loff_t size,
> +			     const unsigned char *filename,
> +			     struct evm_ima_xattr_data **xattr_value_,
> +			     int *xattr_len_, int opened)
>  {
>  	static const char op[] = "appraise_data";
>  	const char *cause = "unknown";
>  	struct dentry *dentry = file_dentry(file);
>  	struct inode *inode = d_backing_inode(dentry);
>  	enum integrity_status status = INTEGRITY_UNKNOWN;
> -	int rc = xattr_len, hash_start = 0;
> +	struct evm_ima_xattr_data *xattr_value = *xattr_value_;
> +	int xattr_len = *xattr_len_, rc = xattr_len, hash_start = 0;
> +	bool appraising_modsig = false;
> +
> +	if (iint->flags & IMA_MODSIG_ALLOWED &&
> +	    !ima_read_modsig(func, buf, size, &xattr_value, &xattr_len)) {
> +		appraising_modsig = true;
> +		rc = xattr_len;
> +	}
> 
> -	if (!(inode->i_opflags & IOP_XATTR))
> +	/* If not appraising a modsig, we need an xattr. */
> +	if (!appraising_modsig && !(inode->i_opflags & IOP_XATTR))
>  		return INTEGRITY_UNKNOWN;
> 
>  	if (rc <= 0) {
> @@ -235,6 +284,9 @@ int ima_appraise_measurement(enum ima_hooks func,
>  	case INTEGRITY_UNKNOWN:
>  		break;
>  	case INTEGRITY_NOXATTRS:	/* No EVM protected xattrs. */
> +		/* It's fine not to have xattrs when using a modsig. */
> +		if (appraising_modsig)
> +			break;
>  	case INTEGRITY_NOLABEL:		/* No security.evm xattr. */
>  		cause = "missing-HMAC";
>  		goto out;
> @@ -242,6 +294,8 @@ int ima_appraise_measurement(enum ima_hooks func,
>  		cause = "invalid-HMAC";
>  		goto out;
>  	}
> +
> + retry:
>  	switch (xattr_value->type) {
>  	case IMA_XATTR_DIGEST_NG:
>  		/* first byte contains algorithm id */
> @@ -285,6 +339,61 @@ int ima_appraise_measurement(enum ima_hooks func,
>  			status = INTEGRITY_PASS;
>  		}
>  		break;
> +	case IMA_MODSIG:
> +		/*
> +		 * To avoid being tricked into an infinite loop, we don't allow
> +		 * a modsig stored in the xattr.
> +		 */
> +		if (!appraising_modsig) {
> +			status = INTEGRITY_UNKNOWN;
> +			cause = "unknown-ima-data";
> +			break;
> +		}
> +		rc = appraise_modsig(iint, xattr_value, xattr_len);
> +		if (!rc) {
> +			kfree(*xattr_value_);
> +			*xattr_value_ = xattr_value;
> +			*xattr_len_ = xattr_len;
> +
> +			status = INTEGRITY_PASS;
> +			break;
> +		}
> +
> +		ima_free_xattr_data(xattr_value);
> +
> +		/*
> +		 * The appended signature failed verification. If there's a
> +		 * signature in the extended attribute, let's fall back to it.
> +		 */
> +		if (inode->i_opflags & IOP_XATTR && *xattr_len_ != 0 &&
> +		    *xattr_len_ != -ENODATA) {

At this point, there was an appended signature verification failure.
 If there isn't an xattr, for whatever reason, shouldn't we be
returning "invalid_signature" and "INTEGRITY_FAIL".  If so, then the
above test could be simplified to check whether there is any data,
like this:

	if ((inode->i_opflags & IOP_XATTR) && (*xattr_len_ > 0)) {

> +			const char *modsig_cause = rc == -EOPNOTSUPP ?
> +				"unknown" : "invalid-signature";

This can then be cleaned up as well.

> +
> +			/* First, log that the modsig verification failed. */
> +			integrity_audit_msg(AUDIT_INTEGRITY_DATA, inode,
> +					    filename, op, modsig_cause, rc, 0);

I'm not sure that we want to audit intermediary signature verification
failures.  Perhaps this audit message should be considered
"additional", meaning it is only emitted if the "integrity_audit" boot
command line option is enabled.  Change the last field to 1 to
indicate it is an "additional" audit message.

> +
> +			xattr_len = rc = *xattr_len_;
> +			xattr_value = *xattr_value_;
> +			appraising_modsig = false;
> +
> +			if (rc > 0)

This test becomes redundant.

> +				/* Process xattr contents. */
> +				goto retry;
> +
> +			/* Unexpected error reading xattr. */
> +			status = INTEGRITY_UNKNOWN;
> +		} else {
> +			if (rc == -EOPNOTSUPP)
> +				status = INTEGRITY_UNKNOWN;
> +			else {
> +				cause = "invalid-signature";
> +				status = INTEGRITY_FAIL;
> +			}
> +		}
> +		break;

I think the rest can be simplified to:
	cause = "invalid-signature";
	status = INTEGRITY_FAIL;

Mimi

  reply	other threads:[~2017-10-31 13:31 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-10-18  0:53 [PATCH v5 00/18] Appended signatures support for IMA appraisal Thiago Jung Bauermann
2017-10-18  0:53 ` [PATCH v5 01/18] ima: Remove redundant conditional operator Thiago Jung Bauermann
2017-10-18  0:53 ` [PATCH v5 02/18] ima: Remove some superfluous parentheses Thiago Jung Bauermann
2017-10-18  0:53 ` [PATCH v5 03/18] evm, ima: Remove " Thiago Jung Bauermann
2017-10-18  0:53 ` [PATCH v5 04/18] evm, ima: Remove more " Thiago Jung Bauermann
2017-10-18  0:53 ` [PATCH v5 05/18] ima: Simplify ima_eventsig_init Thiago Jung Bauermann
2017-10-18  0:53 ` [PATCH v5 06/18] ima: Improvements in ima_appraise_measurement Thiago Jung Bauermann
2017-10-18  0:53 ` [PATCH v5 07/18] integrity: Introduce struct evm_xattr Thiago Jung Bauermann
2017-10-18  0:53 ` [PATCH v5 08/18] integrity: Select CONFIG_KEYS instead of depending on it Thiago Jung Bauermann
2017-10-18  0:53 ` [PATCH v5 09/18] ima: Don't pass xattr value to EVM xattr verification Thiago Jung Bauermann
2017-10-18  0:53 ` [PATCH v5 10/18] ima: Store measurement after appraisal Thiago Jung Bauermann
2017-10-18  0:53 ` [PATCH v5 11/18] ima: Export func_tokens Thiago Jung Bauermann
2017-10-18  0:53 ` [PATCH v5 12/18] MODSIGN: Export module signature definitions Thiago Jung Bauermann
2017-10-26 20:12   ` Mimi Zohar
2017-10-26 22:47     ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2017-10-26 23:13       ` Mimi Zohar
2017-10-18  0:53 ` [PATCH v5 13/18] PKCS#7: Introduce pkcs7_get_message_sig and verify_pkcs7_message_sig Thiago Jung Bauermann
2017-10-26 20:12   ` Mimi Zohar
2017-10-18  0:53 ` [PATCH v5 14/18] integrity: Introduce integrity_keyring_from_id Thiago Jung Bauermann
2017-10-18  0:53 ` [PATCH v5 15/18] ima: Add modsig appraise_type option for module-style appended signatures Thiago Jung Bauermann
2017-10-18  0:53 ` [PATCH v5 16/18] ima: Add functions to read and verify a modsig signature Thiago Jung Bauermann
2017-10-18  0:53 ` [PATCH v5 17/18] ima: Implement support for module-style appended signatures Thiago Jung Bauermann
2017-10-31 13:31   ` Mimi Zohar [this message]
2017-10-18  0:53 ` [PATCH v5 18/18] ima: Write modsig to the measurement list Thiago Jung Bauermann
2017-10-26 20:07   ` Mimi Zohar
2017-10-26 22:02     ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2017-10-26 20:53 ` [PATCH v5 00/18] Appended signatures support for IMA appraisal Mimi Zohar

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=1509456695.3583.226.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --to=zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=bauerman@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
    --cc=dmitry.kasatkin@gmail.com \
    --cc=dwmw2@infradead.org \
    --cc=herbert@gondor.apana.org.au \
    --cc=james.l.morris@oracle.com \
    --cc=jeyu@redhat.com \
    --cc=keyrings@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
    --cc=serge@hallyn.com \
    --cc=takahiro.akashi@linaro.org \
    /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).