linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/3] integrity: Linux Integrity Module(LIM)

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 14 Oct 2008 10:53:59 -0500
From:	"Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@...ibm.com>
To:	david safford <safford@...son.ibm.com>
Cc:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
	Serge Hallyn <serue@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] integrity: Linux Integrity Module(LIM)

Quoting david safford (safford@...son.ibm.com):
> On Tue, 2008-10-14 at 09:28 -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > >  int vfs_permission(struct nameidata *nd, int mask)
> > >  {
> > > -	return inode_permission(nd->path.dentry->d_inode, mask);
> > > +	int retval;
> > > +
> > > +	retval = inode_permission(nd->path.dentry->d_inode, mask);
> > > +	if (retval)
> > > +		return retval;
> > > +	return integrity_inode_permission(NULL, &nd->path,
> > > +					  mask & (MAY_READ | MAY_WRITE |
> > > +						  MAY_EXEC));
> > >  }
> > >  
> > >  /**
> > > @@ -306,7 +314,14 @@ int vfs_permission(struct nameidata *nd, int mask)
> > >   */
> > >  int file_permission(struct file *file, int mask)
> > >  {
> > > -	return inode_permission(file->f_path.dentry->d_inode, mask);
> > > +	int retval;
> > > +
> > > +	retval = inode_permission(file->f_path.dentry->d_inode, mask);
> > > +	if (retval)
> > > +		return retval;
> > > +	return integrity_inode_permission(file, NULL,
> > > +					  mask & (MAY_READ | MAY_WRITE |
> > > +						  MAY_EXEC));
> > 
> > Please don't add anything here as these two wrappers will go away.
> > Please only make decisions based on what you get in inode_permission().
> 
> Hmm... As Mimi mentioned in the last review, we really need access
> to a path, which is not available in inode_permission. (Note the
> path is not used to make any integrity decision, but is recorded along
> with the measurement to help with the integrity analysis by a third
> party verifier.) Yes, there are other callers without path information,
> but getting a path here covers the bulk of the measurements.
> 
> Is there some other alternative, other than this, or passing the 
> dentry into inode_permission, which was also rejected?

Whatever happened to the patch Mimi had floated to use the audit
subsystem to output a pathname?  I thought that was pretty neat,
and it made particularly clear the the pathname was purely
informational.

-serge
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/