[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1351780159.15708.17.camel@falcor>
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2012 10:29:19 -0400
From: Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>
Cc: Matthew Garrett <mjg@...hat.com>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Khalid Aziz <khalid@...ehiking.org>, kexec@...ts.infradead.org,
horms@...ge.net.au, Dave Young <dyoung@...hat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
linux kernel mailing list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Dmitry Kasatkin <dmitry.kasatkin@...el.com>,
Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@...ito.it>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Subject: Re: Kdump with signed images
On Thu, 2012-11-01 at 09:53 -0400, Vivek Goyal wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 01, 2012 at 09:10:03AM -0400, Vivek Goyal wrote:
>
> [..]
> > >
> > > > - So say we can sign /sbin/kexec at build time and distros can do that.
> > > > - Verify the signature at exec time using kernel keyring and if
> > > > verification happens successfully, say process gains extra capability.
> > > > - Use this new capability to determine whether kexec_load() will be
> > > > successful or not.
> > > >
> > > > Even if we can do all this, it still has the issue of being able to
> > > > stop the process in user space and replace the code at run time
> > > > and be able to launch unsigned kernel.
> >
> > Thinking more about it. Can we just keep track whether a process was
> > ptraced or not and disallow kexec_load() syscall if it was ptraced.
> > (I am assuming that ptrace is the only way to change process code/data).
> >
> > So binaries can be signed offline. Signature verification can take place
> > using kernel keyring at exec() time. And we can keep track of ptraced
> > processes and disallow calling kexec_load() for such processes. If this
> > is implementable, this should take care of following requirement raised
> > by matthew.
> >
> > ************************************************************************
> > It must be impossible for the kernel to launch any /sbin/kexec that hasn't
> > been signed by a trusted key that's been built into the kernel, and it
> > must be impossible for anything other than /sbin/kexec to make the kexec
> > system call.
> > *************************************************************************
> >
> > Thoughts?
>
> Eric responded but my mistake he responded to only me. So I will quickly
> put his idea here.
>
> [start quote]
>
> You can't ptrace a process that has a capability you don't.
>
> That should be enforced in security/commoncap/
>
> [end quote]
>
> This looks like a good idea. Upon verification signed binaries will be
> assigned special capability and then no unsigned binary should be able
> to ptrace signed/verified processes
That's a good generic solution, which I'm all in favor of, but it
doesn't resolve the latter half of Matthrew's requirement "and it must
be impossible for anything other than /sbin/kexec to make the kexec
system call."
thanks,
Mimi
--
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