| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <s5hobjia6vj.wl%tiwai@suse.de>
Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2012 18:28:16 +0100
From: Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de>
To: Matthew Garrett <mjg@...hat.com>
Cc: Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, linux-efi@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] Second attempt at kernel secure boot support
At Mon, 29 Oct 2012 17:41:31 +0000,
Matthew Garrett wrote:
>
> On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 08:49:41AM +0100, Jiri Kosina wrote:
> > On Thu, 20 Sep 2012, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> >
> > > This is pretty much identical to the first patchset, but with the capability
> > > renamed (CAP_COMPROMISE_KERNEL) and the kexec patch dropped. If anyone wants
> > > to deploy these then they should disable kexec until support for signed
> > > kexec payloads has been merged.
> >
> > Apparently your patchset currently doesn't handle device firmware loading,
> > nor do you seem to mention in in the comments.
>
> Correct.
>
> > I believe signed firmware loading should be put on plate as well, right?
>
> I think that's definitely something that should be covered. I hadn't
> worried about it immediately as any attack would be limited to machines
> with a specific piece of hardware, and the attacker would need to expend
> a significant amount of reverse engineering work on the firmware - and
> we'd probably benefit from them doing that in the long run...
request_firmware() is used for microcode loading, too, so it's fairly
a core part to cover, I'm afraid.
I played a bit about this yesterday. The patch below is a proof of
concept to (ab)use the module signing mechanism for firmware loading
too. Sign firmware files via scripts/sign-file, and put to
/lib/firmware/signed directory.
It's just a rough cut, and the module options are other pieces there
should be polished better, of course. Also another signature string
should be better for firmware files :)
Takashi
---
diff --git a/drivers/base/Kconfig b/drivers/base/Kconfig
index b34b5cd..2bc8415 100644
--- a/drivers/base/Kconfig
+++ b/drivers/base/Kconfig
@@ -145,6 +145,12 @@ config EXTRA_FIRMWARE_DIR
this option you can point it elsewhere, such as /lib/firmware/ or
some other directory containing the firmware files.
+config FIRMWARE_SIG
+ bool "Firmware signature check"
+ depends on FW_LOADER && MODULE_SIG
+ help
+ Check the embedded signature of firmware files like signed modules.
+
config DEBUG_DRIVER
bool "Driver Core verbose debug messages"
depends on DEBUG_KERNEL
diff --git a/drivers/base/firmware_class.c b/drivers/base/firmware_class.c
index 8945f4e..81fc8a4 100644
--- a/drivers/base/firmware_class.c
+++ b/drivers/base/firmware_class.c
@@ -268,6 +268,12 @@ static void fw_free_buf(struct firmware_buf *buf)
/* direct firmware loading support */
static const char *fw_path[] = {
+#ifdef CONFIG_FIRMWARE_SIG
+ "/lib/firmware/updates/" UTS_RELEASE "/signed",
+ "/lib/firmware/updates/signed",
+ "/lib/firmware/" UTS_RELEASE "/signed",
+ "/lib/firmware/signed",
+#endif
"/lib/firmware/updates/" UTS_RELEASE,
"/lib/firmware/updates",
"/lib/firmware/" UTS_RELEASE,
@@ -844,6 +850,41 @@ exit:
return fw_priv;
}
+#ifdef CONFIG_FIRMWARE_SIG
+/* XXX */
+extern int mod_verify_sig(const void *mod, unsigned long *_modlen);
+
+static bool sig_enforce;
+module_param(sig_enforce, bool, 0444);
+
+static int firmware_sig_check(struct firmware_buf *buf)
+{
+ unsigned long markerlen = sizeof(MODULE_SIG_STRING) - 1;
+ long len;
+ int err;
+
+ len = buf->size - markerlen;
+ if (len <= 0 ||
+ memcmp(buf->data + len, MODULE_SIG_STRING, markerlen)) {
+ pr_debug("%s: no signature found\n", buf->fw_id);
+ return sig_enforce ? -ENOKEY : 0;
+ }
+ err = mod_verify_sig(buf->data, &len);
+ if (err < 0) {
+ pr_debug("%s: signature error: %d\n", buf->fw_id, err);
+ return err;
+ }
+ buf->size = len;
+ pr_debug("%s: signature OK!\n", buf->fw_id);
+ return 0;
+}
+#else
+static inline int firmware_sig_check(struct firmware_buf *buf)
+{
+ return 0;
+}
+#endif
+
static int _request_firmware_load(struct firmware_priv *fw_priv, bool uevent,
long timeout)
{
@@ -909,6 +950,9 @@ handle_fw:
if (!buf->size || test_bit(FW_STATUS_ABORT, &buf->status))
retval = -ENOENT;
+ if (!retval)
+ retval = firmware_sig_check(buf);
+
/*
* add firmware name into devres list so that we can auto cache
* and uncache firmware for device.
diff --git a/kernel/module_signing.c b/kernel/module_signing.c
index ea1b1df..c39f49b 100644
--- a/kernel/module_signing.c
+++ b/kernel/module_signing.c
@@ -11,6 +11,7 @@
#include <linux/kernel.h>
#include <linux/err.h>
+#include <linux/export.h>
#include <crypto/public_key.h>
#include <crypto/hash.h>
#include <keys/asymmetric-type.h>
@@ -247,3 +248,4 @@ error_put_key:
pr_devel("<==%s() = %d\n", __func__, ret);
return ret;
}
+EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(mod_verify_sig);
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists