linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] X.509: Partially revert patch to add validation against IMA MOK keyring

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20160113191900.GG7826@localhost>
Date:	Wed, 13 Jan 2016 21:19:01 +0200
From:	Petko Manolov <petkan@...-labs.com>
To:	Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc:	David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
	James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
	linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, keyrings@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mdb@...iper.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH] X.509: Partially revert patch to add validation against
 IMA MOK keyring

On 16-01-13 13:56:39, Mimi Zohar wrote:
> On Wed, 2016-01-13 at 20:35 +0200, Petko Manolov wrote:
> > On 16-01-13 18:19:10, David Howells wrote:
> > > Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > I beg to differ.  The IMA model is not broken with the current patches
> > > > being upstreamed.  The basic concepts developed will continue to be
> > > > used, perhaps not directly by IMA.
> > > 
> > > I still object to the change to x509_key_preparse() and still want it 
> > > reverting or removing.  It affects module signing too.
> > 
> > The only problem i see with the code is that in case .ima_mok is not configured 
> > x509_validate_trust() returns NULL, which falsely set the key as trusted.  This 
> > could easily be fixed.
> 
> When IMA_MOK_KEYRING is not enabled, get_ima_mok_keyring() will return NULL.  
> x509_validate_trust() will return -EOPNOTSUPP.
> 
> The code is fine.

Oops, my bad.  It's been a while since i wrote that code... :)


		Petko