linux-kernel - Re: [RFC v2 4/7] modsig: add integrity_module

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:	Thu, 16 Aug 2012 14:49:28 -0400
From:	Josh Boyer <jwboyer@...il.com>
To:	Dmitry Kasatkin <dmitry.kasatkin@...el.com>
Cc:	zohar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, jmorris@...ei.org, rusty@...tcorp.com.au,
	dhowells@...hat.com, linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC v2 4/7] modsig: add integrity_module_check hook

On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 2:43 PM, Dmitry Kasatkin
<dmitry.kasatkin@...el.com> wrote:
> @@ -2437,6 +2438,14 @@ static int copy_and_check(struct load_info *info,
>
>         info->hdr = hdr;
>         info->len = len;
> +
> +       err = integrity_module_check(hdr, len);
> +       if (err < 0)
> +               goto free_hdr;
> +
> +       /* cut signature tail */
> +       info->len = err;
> +
>         return 0;
>
>  free_hdr:

So if I'm reading this correctly, any module that fails signature
verification will fail to load.  That makes sense, but I wonder if you
intend to support a non-enforcing mode for module signatures at all?
Actually, a brief document in Documentation describing how this whole
mechanism works and what the fail states are would be good.  David's
patches have it nicely spelled out and I don't see anything similar in
your patch set.

josh
--
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/