From: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> To: James Morris <jmorris@namei.org> Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>, Casey Schaufler <casey@schaufler-ca.com>, John Johansen <john.johansen@canonical.com>, Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp>, Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore.com>, Stephen Smalley <sds@tycho.nsa.gov>, "Schaufler, Casey" <casey.schaufler@intel.com>, LSM <linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org>, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: [PATCH security-next v3 13/29] LoadPin: Rename "enable" to "enforce" Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2018 17:18:16 -0700 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20180925001832.18322-14-keescook@chromium.org> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20180925001832.18322-1-keescook@chromium.org> LoadPin's "enable" setting is really about enforcement, not whether or not the LSM is using LSM hooks. Instead, split this out so that LSM enabling can be logically distinct from whether enforcement is happening (for example, the pinning happens when the LSM is enabled, but the pin is only checked when "enforce" is set). This allows LoadPin to continue to operate sanely in test environments once LSM enable/disable is centrally handled (i.e. we want LoadPin to be enabled separately from its enforcement). Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> --- security/loadpin/Kconfig | 4 ++-- security/loadpin/loadpin.c | 21 +++++++++++---------- 2 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-) diff --git a/security/loadpin/Kconfig b/security/loadpin/Kconfig index dd01aa91e521..8653608a3693 100644 --- a/security/loadpin/Kconfig +++ b/security/loadpin/Kconfig @@ -10,10 +10,10 @@ config SECURITY_LOADPIN have a root filesystem backed by a read-only device such as dm-verity or a CDROM. -config SECURITY_LOADPIN_ENABLED +config SECURITY_LOADPIN_ENFORCING bool "Enforce LoadPin at boot" depends on SECURITY_LOADPIN help If selected, LoadPin will enforce pinning at boot. If not selected, it can be enabled at boot with the kernel parameter - "loadpin.enabled=1". + "loadpin.enforcing=1". diff --git a/security/loadpin/loadpin.c b/security/loadpin/loadpin.c index 0716af28808a..d8a68a6f6fef 100644 --- a/security/loadpin/loadpin.c +++ b/security/loadpin/loadpin.c @@ -44,7 +44,7 @@ static void report_load(const char *origin, struct file *file, char *operation) kfree(pathname); } -static int enabled = IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SECURITY_LOADPIN_ENABLED); +static int enforcing = IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SECURITY_LOADPIN_ENFORCING); static struct super_block *pinned_root; static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(pinned_root_spinlock); @@ -60,8 +60,8 @@ static struct ctl_path loadpin_sysctl_path[] = { static struct ctl_table loadpin_sysctl_table[] = { { - .procname = "enabled", - .data = &enabled, + .procname = "enforcing", + .data = &enforcing, .maxlen = sizeof(int), .mode = 0644, .proc_handler = proc_dointvec_minmax, @@ -97,7 +97,7 @@ static void check_pinning_enforcement(struct super_block *mnt_sb) loadpin_sysctl_table)) pr_notice("sysctl registration failed!\n"); else - pr_info("load pinning can be disabled.\n"); + pr_info("enforcement can be disabled.\n"); } else pr_info("load pinning engaged.\n"); } @@ -128,7 +128,7 @@ static int loadpin_read_file(struct file *file, enum kernel_read_file_id id) /* This handles the older init_module API that has a NULL file. */ if (!file) { - if (!enabled) { + if (!enforcing) { report_load(origin, NULL, "old-api-pinning-ignored"); return 0; } @@ -151,7 +151,7 @@ static int loadpin_read_file(struct file *file, enum kernel_read_file_id id) * Unlock now since it's only pinned_root we care about. * In the worst case, we will (correctly) report pinning * failures before we have announced that pinning is - * enabled. This would be purely cosmetic. + * enforcing. This would be purely cosmetic. */ spin_unlock(&pinned_root_spinlock); check_pinning_enforcement(pinned_root); @@ -161,7 +161,7 @@ static int loadpin_read_file(struct file *file, enum kernel_read_file_id id) } if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(pinned_root) || load_root != pinned_root) { - if (unlikely(!enabled)) { + if (unlikely(!enforcing)) { report_load(origin, file, "pinning-ignored"); return 0; } @@ -186,10 +186,11 @@ static struct security_hook_list loadpin_hooks[] __lsm_ro_after_init = { void __init loadpin_add_hooks(void) { - pr_info("ready to pin (currently %sabled)", enabled ? "en" : "dis"); + pr_info("ready to pin (currently %senforcing)\n", + enforcing ? "" : "not "); security_add_hooks(loadpin_hooks, ARRAY_SIZE(loadpin_hooks), "loadpin"); } /* Should not be mutable after boot, so not listed in sysfs (perm == 0). */ -module_param(enabled, int, 0); -MODULE_PARM_DESC(enabled, "Pin module/firmware loading (default: true)"); +module_param(enforcing, int, 0); +MODULE_PARM_DESC(enforcing, "Enforce module/firmware pinning"); -- 2.17.1
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: keescook@chromium.org (Kees Cook) To: linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org Subject: [PATCH security-next v3 13/29] LoadPin: Rename "enable" to "enforce" Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2018 17:18:16 -0700 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20180925001832.18322-14-keescook@chromium.org> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20180925001832.18322-1-keescook@chromium.org> LoadPin's "enable" setting is really about enforcement, not whether or not the LSM is using LSM hooks. Instead, split this out so that LSM enabling can be logically distinct from whether enforcement is happening (for example, the pinning happens when the LSM is enabled, but the pin is only checked when "enforce" is set). This allows LoadPin to continue to operate sanely in test environments once LSM enable/disable is centrally handled (i.e. we want LoadPin to be enabled separately from its enforcement). Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> --- security/loadpin/Kconfig | 4 ++-- security/loadpin/loadpin.c | 21 +++++++++++---------- 2 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-) diff --git a/security/loadpin/Kconfig b/security/loadpin/Kconfig index dd01aa91e521..8653608a3693 100644 --- a/security/loadpin/Kconfig +++ b/security/loadpin/Kconfig @@ -10,10 +10,10 @@ config SECURITY_LOADPIN have a root filesystem backed by a read-only device such as dm-verity or a CDROM. -config SECURITY_LOADPIN_ENABLED +config SECURITY_LOADPIN_ENFORCING bool "Enforce LoadPin at boot" depends on SECURITY_LOADPIN help If selected, LoadPin will enforce pinning at boot. If not selected, it can be enabled at boot with the kernel parameter - "loadpin.enabled=1". + "loadpin.enforcing=1". diff --git a/security/loadpin/loadpin.c b/security/loadpin/loadpin.c index 0716af28808a..d8a68a6f6fef 100644 --- a/security/loadpin/loadpin.c +++ b/security/loadpin/loadpin.c @@ -44,7 +44,7 @@ static void report_load(const char *origin, struct file *file, char *operation) kfree(pathname); } -static int enabled = IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SECURITY_LOADPIN_ENABLED); +static int enforcing = IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SECURITY_LOADPIN_ENFORCING); static struct super_block *pinned_root; static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(pinned_root_spinlock); @@ -60,8 +60,8 @@ static struct ctl_path loadpin_sysctl_path[] = { static struct ctl_table loadpin_sysctl_table[] = { { - .procname = "enabled", - .data = &enabled, + .procname = "enforcing", + .data = &enforcing, .maxlen = sizeof(int), .mode = 0644, .proc_handler = proc_dointvec_minmax, @@ -97,7 +97,7 @@ static void check_pinning_enforcement(struct super_block *mnt_sb) loadpin_sysctl_table)) pr_notice("sysctl registration failed!\n"); else - pr_info("load pinning can be disabled.\n"); + pr_info("enforcement can be disabled.\n"); } else pr_info("load pinning engaged.\n"); } @@ -128,7 +128,7 @@ static int loadpin_read_file(struct file *file, enum kernel_read_file_id id) /* This handles the older init_module API that has a NULL file. */ if (!file) { - if (!enabled) { + if (!enforcing) { report_load(origin, NULL, "old-api-pinning-ignored"); return 0; } @@ -151,7 +151,7 @@ static int loadpin_read_file(struct file *file, enum kernel_read_file_id id) * Unlock now since it's only pinned_root we care about. * In the worst case, we will (correctly) report pinning * failures before we have announced that pinning is - * enabled. This would be purely cosmetic. + * enforcing. This would be purely cosmetic. */ spin_unlock(&pinned_root_spinlock); check_pinning_enforcement(pinned_root); @@ -161,7 +161,7 @@ static int loadpin_read_file(struct file *file, enum kernel_read_file_id id) } if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(pinned_root) || load_root != pinned_root) { - if (unlikely(!enabled)) { + if (unlikely(!enforcing)) { report_load(origin, file, "pinning-ignored"); return 0; } @@ -186,10 +186,11 @@ static struct security_hook_list loadpin_hooks[] __lsm_ro_after_init = { void __init loadpin_add_hooks(void) { - pr_info("ready to pin (currently %sabled)", enabled ? "en" : "dis"); + pr_info("ready to pin (currently %senforcing)\n", + enforcing ? "" : "not "); security_add_hooks(loadpin_hooks, ARRAY_SIZE(loadpin_hooks), "loadpin"); } /* Should not be mutable after boot, so not listed in sysfs (perm == 0). */ -module_param(enabled, int, 0); -MODULE_PARM_DESC(enabled, "Pin module/firmware loading (default: true)"); +module_param(enforcing, int, 0); +MODULE_PARM_DESC(enforcing, "Enforce module/firmware pinning"); -- 2.17.1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-09-25 0:18 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 126+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2018-09-25 0:18 [PATCH security-next v3 00/29] LSM: Explict LSM ordering Kees Cook 2018-09-25 0:18 ` Kees Cook 2018-09-25 0:18 ` [PATCH security-next v3 01/29] LSM: Correctly announce start of LSM initialization Kees Cook 2018-09-25 0:18 ` Kees Cook 2018-10-01 19:53 ` James Morris 2018-10-01 21:05 ` John Johansen 2018-09-25 0:18 ` [PATCH security-next v3 02/29] vmlinux.lds.h: Avoid copy/paste of security_init section Kees Cook 2018-09-25 0:18 ` Kees Cook 2018-10-01 19:56 ` James Morris 2018-10-01 21:05 ` John Johansen 2018-09-25 0:18 ` [PATCH security-next v3 03/29] LSM: Rename .security_initcall section to .lsm_info Kees Cook 2018-09-25 0:18 ` Kees Cook 2018-10-01 19:57 ` James Morris 2018-10-01 21:06 ` John Johansen 2018-09-25 0:18 ` [PATCH security-next v3 04/29] LSM: Remove initcall tracing Kees Cook 2018-09-25 0:18 ` Kees Cook 2018-09-26 16:35 ` Steven Rostedt 2018-09-26 16:35 ` Steven Rostedt 2018-09-26 18:35 ` Kees Cook 2018-09-26 18:35 ` Kees Cook 2018-09-30 23:25 ` Steven Rostedt 2018-09-30 23:25 ` Steven Rostedt 2018-10-01 1:01 ` Kees Cook 2018-10-01 1:01 ` Kees Cook 2018-10-01 21:07 ` John Johansen 2018-10-01 21:23 ` Steven Rostedt 2018-10-01 22:38 ` Kees Cook 2018-09-25 0:18 ` [PATCH security-next v3 05/29] LSM: Convert from initcall to struct lsm_info Kees Cook 2018-09-25 0:18 ` Kees Cook 2018-10-01 19:59 ` James Morris 2018-10-01 21:08 ` John Johansen 2018-09-25 0:18 ` [PATCH security-next v3 06/29] vmlinux.lds.h: Move LSM_TABLE into INIT_DATA Kees Cook 2018-09-25 0:18 ` Kees Cook 2018-10-01 21:10 ` John Johansen 2018-09-25 0:18 ` [PATCH security-next v3 07/29] LSM: Convert security_initcall() into DEFINE_LSM() Kees Cook 2018-09-25 0:18 ` Kees Cook 2018-10-01 21:12 ` John Johansen 2018-09-25 0:18 ` [PATCH security-next v3 08/29] LSM: Record LSM name in struct lsm_info Kees Cook 2018-09-25 0:18 ` Kees Cook 2018-10-01 21:13 ` John Johansen 2018-09-25 0:18 ` [PATCH security-next v3 09/29] LSM: Provide init debugging infrastructure Kees Cook 2018-09-25 0:18 ` Kees Cook 2018-10-01 21:14 ` John Johansen 2018-09-25 0:18 ` [PATCH security-next v3 10/29] LSM: Don't ignore initialization failures Kees Cook 2018-09-25 0:18 ` Kees Cook 2018-10-01 21:14 ` John Johansen 2018-09-25 0:18 ` [PATCH security-next v3 11/29] LSM: Introduce LSM_FLAG_LEGACY_MAJOR Kees Cook 2018-09-25 0:18 ` Kees Cook 2018-10-01 21:15 ` John Johansen 2018-09-25 0:18 ` [PATCH security-next v3 12/29] LSM: Provide separate ordered initialization Kees Cook 2018-09-25 0:18 ` Kees Cook 2018-10-01 21:17 ` John Johansen 2018-10-01 22:03 ` Kees Cook 2018-09-25 0:18 ` Kees Cook [this message] 2018-09-25 0:18 ` [PATCH security-next v3 13/29] LoadPin: Rename "enable" to "enforce" Kees Cook 2018-10-01 21:17 ` John Johansen 2018-09-25 0:18 ` [PATCH security-next v3 14/29] LSM: Plumb visibility into optional "enabled" state Kees Cook 2018-09-25 0:18 ` Kees Cook 2018-10-01 21:18 ` John Johansen 2018-10-01 21:47 ` James Morris 2018-10-01 21:56 ` Kees Cook 2018-10-01 22:20 ` John Johansen 2018-10-01 22:29 ` Kees Cook 2018-10-01 22:53 ` John Johansen 2018-09-25 0:18 ` [PATCH security-next v3 15/29] LSM: Lift LSM selection out of individual LSMs Kees Cook 2018-09-25 0:18 ` Kees Cook 2018-10-01 21:18 ` John Johansen 2018-09-25 0:18 ` [PATCH security-next v3 16/29] LSM: Prepare for arbitrary LSM enabling Kees Cook 2018-09-25 0:18 ` Kees Cook 2018-10-01 21:22 ` John Johansen 2018-09-25 0:18 ` [PATCH security-next v3 17/29] LSM: Introduce CONFIG_LSM_ENABLE Kees Cook 2018-09-25 0:18 ` Kees Cook 2018-10-01 21:34 ` John Johansen 2018-09-25 0:18 ` [PATCH security-next v3 18/29] LSM: Introduce lsm.enable= and lsm.disable= Kees Cook 2018-09-25 0:18 ` Kees Cook 2018-10-01 21:46 ` John Johansen 2018-10-01 22:27 ` Kees Cook 2018-10-01 22:48 ` John Johansen 2018-10-01 23:30 ` Kees Cook 2018-10-01 23:38 ` Kees Cook 2018-10-01 23:57 ` John Johansen 2018-10-01 23:44 ` John Johansen 2018-10-01 23:49 ` Kees Cook 2018-09-25 0:18 ` [PATCH security-next v3 19/29] LSM: Prepare for reorganizing "security=" logic Kees Cook 2018-09-25 0:18 ` Kees Cook 2018-10-01 21:47 ` John Johansen 2018-09-25 0:18 ` [PATCH security-next v3 20/29] LSM: Refactor "security=" in terms of enable/disable Kees Cook 2018-09-25 0:18 ` Kees Cook 2018-09-25 0:18 ` [PATCH security-next v3 21/29] LSM: Build ordered list of ordered LSMs for init Kees Cook 2018-09-25 0:18 ` Kees Cook 2018-09-25 0:18 ` [PATCH security-next v3 22/29] LSM: Introduce CONFIG_LSM_ORDER Kees Cook 2018-09-25 0:18 ` Kees Cook 2018-09-25 0:18 ` [PATCH security-next v3 23/29] LSM: Introduce "lsm.order=" for boottime ordering Kees Cook 2018-09-25 0:18 ` Kees Cook 2018-09-25 0:18 ` [PATCH security-next v3 24/29] LoadPin: Initialize as ordered LSM Kees Cook 2018-09-25 0:18 ` Kees Cook 2018-09-25 0:18 ` [PATCH security-next v3 25/29] Yama: " Kees Cook 2018-09-25 0:18 ` Kees Cook 2018-09-25 0:18 ` [PATCH security-next v3 26/29] LSM: Introduce enum lsm_order Kees Cook 2018-09-25 0:18 ` Kees Cook 2018-09-25 0:18 ` [PATCH security-next v3 27/29] capability: Initialize as LSM_ORDER_FIRST Kees Cook 2018-09-25 0:18 ` Kees Cook 2018-09-25 0:18 ` [PATCH security-next v3 28/29] LSM: Separate idea of "major" LSM from "exclusive" LSM Kees Cook 2018-09-25 0:18 ` Kees Cook 2018-09-25 0:18 ` [PATCH security-next v3 29/29] LSM: Add all exclusive LSMs to ordered initialization Kees Cook 2018-09-25 0:18 ` Kees Cook 2018-09-28 15:55 ` [PATCH security-next v3 00/29] LSM: Explict LSM ordering Casey Schaufler 2018-09-28 15:55 ` Casey Schaufler 2018-09-28 20:01 ` Kees Cook 2018-09-28 20:01 ` Kees Cook 2018-09-28 20:25 ` Stephen Smalley 2018-09-28 20:25 ` Stephen Smalley 2018-09-28 20:33 ` Stephen Smalley 2018-09-28 20:33 ` Stephen Smalley 2018-09-28 20:54 ` Kees Cook 2018-09-28 20:54 ` Kees Cook 2018-09-29 10:48 ` Tetsuo Handa 2018-09-29 10:48 ` Tetsuo Handa 2018-09-29 18:18 ` Kees Cook 2018-09-29 18:18 ` Kees Cook 2018-09-30 2:36 ` Tetsuo Handa 2018-09-30 2:36 ` Tetsuo Handa 2018-09-30 16:57 ` Kees Cook 2018-09-30 16:57 ` Kees Cook 2018-09-29 18:19 ` John Johansen 2018-09-29 18:19 ` John Johansen
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=20180925001832.18322-14-keescook@chromium.org \ --to=keescook@chromium.org \ --cc=casey.schaufler@intel.com \ --cc=casey@schaufler-ca.com \ --cc=corbet@lwn.net \ --cc=jmorris@namei.org \ --cc=john.johansen@canonical.com \ --cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=paul@paul-moore.com \ --cc=penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp \ --cc=sds@tycho.nsa.gov \ /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: linkBe 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.