linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Eric Snowberg <eric.snowberg@oracle.com>
To: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>,
	David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
Cc: dwmw2@infradead.org, herbert@gondor.apana.org.au,
	davem@davemloft.net, jmorris@namei.org, serge@hallyn.com,
	nayna@linux.ibm.com, Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com>,
	erichte@linux.ibm.com, mpe@ellerman.id.au,
	keyrings@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org,
	James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] certs: Add EFI_CERT_X509_GUID support for dbx entries
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2021 17:11:10 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <A05E3573-B1AF-474B-94A5-779E69E5880A@oracle.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <X/9a8naM8p4tT5sO@linux.intel.com>


> On Jan 13, 2021, at 1:41 PM, Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> 
> On Tue, Jan 12, 2021 at 02:57:39PM +0000, David Howells wrote:
>> Eric Snowberg <eric.snowberg@oracle.com> wrote:
>> 
>>>> On Dec 10, 2020, at 2:49 AM, David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Eric Snowberg <eric.snowberg@oracle.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Add support for EFI_CERT_X509_GUID dbx entries. When a EFI_CERT_X509_GUID
>>>>> is found, it is added as an asymmetrical key to the .blacklist keyring.
>>>>> Anytime the .platform keyring is used, the keys in the .blacklist keyring
>>>>> are referenced, if a matching key is found, the key will be rejected.
>>>> 
>>>> Ummm...  Why this way and not as a blacklist key which takes up less space?
>>>> I'm guessing that you're using the key chain matching logic.  We really only
>>>> need to blacklist the key IDs.
>>> 
>>> I implemented it this way so that certs in the dbx would only impact 
>>> the .platform keyring. I was under the impression we didn’t want to have 
>>> Secure Boot UEFI db/dbx certs dictate keyring functionality within the kernel
>>> itself. Meaning if we have a matching dbx cert in any other keyring (builtin,
>>> secondary, ima, etc.), it would be allowed. If that is not how you’d like to 
>>> see it done, let me know and I’ll make the change.
>> 
>> I wonder if that is that the right thing to do.  I guess this is a policy
>> decision and may depend on the particular user.
> 
> Why would you want to allow dbx entry in any keyring?

Today, DB and MOK certs go into the platform keyring.  These certs are only
referenced during kexec.  They can’t be used for other things like validating
kernel module signatures.  If we follow the same pattern, the DBX and MOKX entries
in the blacklist keyring should only impact kexec. 

Currently, Mickaël Salaün has another outstanding series to allow root to update 
the blacklist keyring.  I assume the use case for this is around certificates used 
within the kernel, for example revoking kernel module signatures.  The question I have
is, should another keyring be introduced?  One that carries DBX and MOKX, which just
correspond to certs/hashes in the platform keyring; this keyring would only be
referenced for kexec, just like the platform keyring is today. Then, the current
blacklist keyring would be used for everything internal to the kernel.


  reply	other threads:[~2021-01-14  0:26 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-09-16  0:49 [PATCH v4] certs: Add EFI_CERT_X509_GUID support for dbx entries Eric Snowberg
2020-09-16 18:09 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2020-12-10  9:49 ` David Howells
2020-12-10 18:56   ` Eric Snowberg
2021-01-12 14:57   ` David Howells
2021-01-13 20:41     ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2021-01-14  0:11       ` Eric Snowberg [this message]
2021-01-15  9:15         ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2021-01-15 16:49           ` Eric Snowberg
2021-01-20 11:26             ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2021-01-20 22:13               ` Eric Snowberg
2021-01-21  0:36                 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2021-01-27 11:46                 ` David Howells
2021-01-27 14:03                   ` Mimi Zohar
2021-01-27 15:41                     ` Eric Snowberg
2021-01-28  4:13                       ` Nayna
2021-01-30 10:24                       ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2021-01-29 23:27                     ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2021-01-12 17:10   ` David Howells
2021-01-12 19:13     ` Eric Snowberg
2021-01-15 17:21 ` James Bottomley
2021-01-15 23:01   ` Eric Snowberg

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=A05E3573-B1AF-474B-94A5-779E69E5880A@oracle.com \
    --to=eric.snowberg@oracle.com \
    --cc=James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
    --cc=dwmw2@infradead.org \
    --cc=erichte@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=herbert@gondor.apana.org.au \
    --cc=jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=jmorris@namei.org \
    --cc=keyrings@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
    --cc=nayna@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=serge@hallyn.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).