All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Thiago Jung Bauermann <bauerman@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: 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,
	Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	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>,
	Thiago Jung Bauermann <bauerman@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: [PATCH v5 10/18] ima: Store measurement after appraisal
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2017 22:53:23 -0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20171018005331.2688-11-bauerman@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20171018005331.2688-1-bauerman@linux.vnet.ibm.com>

When module-style signatures appended at the end of files are supported for
IMA appraisal, the code will fallback to the xattr signature if the
appended one fails to verify.

The problem is that we don't know whether we need to fallback to the xattr
signature until the appraise step, and by then the measure step was already
completed and would need to be done again in case the template includes the
signature.

To avoid this problem, do the appraisal first so that the correct signature
is stored by the template in the measure step.

Suggested-by: Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: Thiago Jung Bauermann <bauerman@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
---
 security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c | 6 +++---
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c b/security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c
index 747a4fd9e2de..8e96450e27f5 100644
--- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c
+++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c
@@ -242,12 +242,12 @@ static int process_measurement(struct file *file, char *buf, loff_t size,
 	if (!pathbuf)	/* ima_rdwr_violation possibly pre-fetched */
 		pathname = ima_d_path(&file->f_path, &pathbuf, filename);
 
-	if (action & IMA_MEASURE)
-		ima_store_measurement(iint, file, pathname,
-				      xattr_value, xattr_len, pcr);
 	if (rc == 0 && (action & IMA_APPRAISE_SUBMASK))
 		rc = ima_appraise_measurement(func, iint, file, pathname,
 					      xattr_value, xattr_len, opened);
+	if (action & IMA_MEASURE)
+		ima_store_measurement(iint, file, pathname,
+				      xattr_value, xattr_len, pcr);
 	if (action & IMA_AUDIT)
 		ima_audit_measurement(iint, pathname);
 

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Thiago Jung Bauermann <bauerman@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: 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,
	Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	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>,
	Thiago Jung Bauermann <bauerman@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: [PATCH v5 10/18] ima: Store measurement after appraisal
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2017 00:53:23 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20171018005331.2688-11-bauerman@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20171018005331.2688-1-bauerman@linux.vnet.ibm.com>

When module-style signatures appended at the end of files are supported for
IMA appraisal, the code will fallback to the xattr signature if the
appended one fails to verify.

The problem is that we don't know whether we need to fallback to the xattr
signature until the appraise step, and by then the measure step was already
completed and would need to be done again in case the template includes the
signature.

To avoid this problem, do the appraisal first so that the correct signature
is stored by the template in the measure step.

Suggested-by: Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: Thiago Jung Bauermann <bauerman@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
---
 security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c | 6 +++---
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c b/security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c
index 747a4fd9e2de..8e96450e27f5 100644
--- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c
+++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c
@@ -242,12 +242,12 @@ static int process_measurement(struct file *file, char *buf, loff_t size,
 	if (!pathbuf)	/* ima_rdwr_violation possibly pre-fetched */
 		pathname = ima_d_path(&file->f_path, &pathbuf, filename);
 
-	if (action & IMA_MEASURE)
-		ima_store_measurement(iint, file, pathname,
-				      xattr_value, xattr_len, pcr);
 	if (rc = 0 && (action & IMA_APPRAISE_SUBMASK))
 		rc = ima_appraise_measurement(func, iint, file, pathname,
 					      xattr_value, xattr_len, opened);
+	if (action & IMA_MEASURE)
+		ima_store_measurement(iint, file, pathname,
+				      xattr_value, xattr_len, pcr);
 	if (action & IMA_AUDIT)
 		ima_audit_measurement(iint, pathname);
 


WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: bauerman@linux.vnet.ibm.com (Thiago Jung Bauermann)
To: linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH v5 10/18] ima: Store measurement after appraisal
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2017 22:53:23 -0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20171018005331.2688-11-bauerman@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20171018005331.2688-1-bauerman@linux.vnet.ibm.com>

When module-style signatures appended at the end of files are supported for
IMA appraisal, the code will fallback to the xattr signature if the
appended one fails to verify.

The problem is that we don't know whether we need to fallback to the xattr
signature until the appraise step, and by then the measure step was already
completed and would need to be done again in case the template includes the
signature.

To avoid this problem, do the appraisal first so that the correct signature
is stored by the template in the measure step.

Suggested-by: Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: Thiago Jung Bauermann <bauerman@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
---
 security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c | 6 +++---
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c b/security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c
index 747a4fd9e2de..8e96450e27f5 100644
--- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c
+++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c
@@ -242,12 +242,12 @@ static int process_measurement(struct file *file, char *buf, loff_t size,
 	if (!pathbuf)	/* ima_rdwr_violation possibly pre-fetched */
 		pathname = ima_d_path(&file->f_path, &pathbuf, filename);
 
-	if (action & IMA_MEASURE)
-		ima_store_measurement(iint, file, pathname,
-				      xattr_value, xattr_len, pcr);
 	if (rc == 0 && (action & IMA_APPRAISE_SUBMASK))
 		rc = ima_appraise_measurement(func, iint, file, pathname,
 					      xattr_value, xattr_len, opened);
+	if (action & IMA_MEASURE)
+		ima_store_measurement(iint, file, pathname,
+				      xattr_value, xattr_len, pcr);
 	if (action & IMA_AUDIT)
 		ima_audit_measurement(iint, pathname);
 

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-security-module" in
the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

  parent reply	other threads:[~2017-10-18  0:53 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 86+ 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 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2017-10-18  0:53 ` 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   ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2017-10-18  0:53   ` 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   ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2017-10-18  0:53   ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2017-10-18  0:53   ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2017-10-18  0:53 ` [PATCH v5 03/18] evm, ima: Remove " Thiago Jung Bauermann
2017-10-18  0:53   ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2017-10-18  0:53   ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2017-10-18  0:53 ` [PATCH v5 04/18] evm, ima: Remove more " Thiago Jung Bauermann
2017-10-18  0:53   ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2017-10-18  0:53   ` 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   ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2017-10-18  0:53   ` 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   ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2017-10-18  0:53   ` 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   ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2017-10-18  0:53   ` 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   ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2017-10-18  0:53   ` 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   ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2017-10-18  0:53   ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2017-10-18  0:53 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann [this message]
2017-10-18  0:53   ` [PATCH v5 10/18] ima: Store measurement after appraisal Thiago Jung Bauermann
2017-10-18  0:53   ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2017-10-18  0:53 ` [PATCH v5 11/18] ima: Export func_tokens Thiago Jung Bauermann
2017-10-18  0:53   ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2017-10-18  0:53   ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2017-10-18  0:53 ` [PATCH v5 12/18] MODSIGN: Export module signature definitions Thiago Jung Bauermann
2017-10-18  0:53   ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2017-10-18  0:53   ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2017-10-26 20:12   ` Mimi Zohar
2017-10-26 20:12     ` Mimi Zohar
2017-10-26 20:12     ` Mimi Zohar
2017-10-26 20:12     ` Mimi Zohar
2017-10-26 22:47     ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2017-10-26 22:47       ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2017-10-26 22:47       ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2017-10-26 23:13       ` Mimi Zohar
2017-10-26 23:13         ` Mimi Zohar
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
2017-10-18  0:53   ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2017-10-18  0:53   ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2017-10-26 20:12   ` Mimi Zohar
2017-10-26 20:12     ` Mimi Zohar
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   ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2017-10-18  0:53   ` 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   ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2017-10-18  0:53   ` 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   ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2017-10-18  0:53   ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2017-10-18  0:53 ` [PATCH v5 17/18] ima: Implement support for module-style appended signatures Thiago Jung Bauermann
2017-10-18  0:53   ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2017-10-18  0:53   ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2017-10-31 13:31   ` Mimi Zohar
2017-10-31 13:31     ` Mimi Zohar
2017-10-31 13:31     ` Mimi Zohar
2017-10-31 13:31     ` Mimi Zohar
2017-10-18  0:53 ` [PATCH v5 18/18] ima: Write modsig to the measurement list Thiago Jung Bauermann
2017-10-18  0:53   ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2017-10-18  0:53   ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2017-10-26 20:07   ` Mimi Zohar
2017-10-26 20:07     ` Mimi Zohar
2017-10-26 20:07     ` Mimi Zohar
2017-10-26 20:07     ` Mimi Zohar
2017-10-26 22:02     ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2017-10-26 22:02       ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
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
2017-10-26 20:53   ` Mimi Zohar
2017-10-26 20:53   ` Mimi Zohar
2017-10-26 20:53   ` 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=20171018005331.2688-11-bauerman@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --to=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 \
    --cc=zohar@linux.vnet.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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.