linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4a 1/2] selftests/kexec: make tests independent of IMA being enabled

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]
Message-ID: <20190325080935.GA12497@dhcp-128-65.nay.redhat.com>
Date:   Mon, 25 Mar 2019 16:09:35 +0800
From:   Dave Young <dyoung@...hat.com>
To:     Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.ibm.com>
Cc:     linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
        kexec@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Petr Vorel <pvorel@...e.cz>, Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4a 1/2] selftests/kexec: make tests independent of IMA
 being enabled

Hi Mimi
On 03/22/19 at 03:35pm, Mimi Zohar wrote:
> Verify IMA is enabled before failing tests or emitting irrelevant
> messages.  Also, don't skip the test if signatures are not required.
> 
> Suggested-by: Dave Young <dyoung@...hat.com>
> Signed-off-by: Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.ibm.com>
> ---
> Dave, if this patch resolves the outstanding issues, I can fold these
> changes into the original patches. (Reminder, these patches will need to
> be updated to support the "lockdown" patch set.)

They looks good to me, thanks for the update

Feel free to add my reviewed-by, I did some tests although not cover all
ima cases.

Thanks
Dave

> 
>  .../selftests/kexec/test_kexec_file_load.sh        | 27 ++++++++++++++--------
>  tools/testing/selftests/kexec/test_kexec_load.sh   | 24 ++++++++++++-------
>  2 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kexec/test_kexec_file_load.sh b/tools/testing/selftests/kexec/test_kexec_file_load.sh
> index 1d2e5e799523..57b636792086 100755
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/kexec/test_kexec_file_load.sh
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kexec/test_kexec_file_load.sh
> @@ -110,11 +110,20 @@ kexec_file_load_test()
>  			log_fail "$succeed_msg (missing IMA sig)"
>  		fi
>  
> -		if [ $pe_sig_required -eq 0 ] && [ $ima_sig_required -eq 0 ] \
> -		    && [ $ima_read_policy -eq 0 ] && [ $ima_signed -eq 0 ]; then
> +		if [ $pe_sig_required -eq 0 ] && [ $ima_appraise -eq 1 ] \
> +		    && [ $ima_sig_required -eq 0 ] && [ $ima_signed -eq 0 ] \
> +	            && [ $ima_read_policy -eq 0 ]; then
>  			log_fail "$succeed_msg (possibly missing IMA sig)"
>  		fi
>  
> +		if [ $pe_sig_required -eq 0 ] && [ $ima_appraise -eq 0 ]; then
> +			log_info "No signature verification required"
> +		elif [ $pe_sig_required -eq 0 ] && [ $ima_appraise -eq 1 ] \
> +		    && [ $ima_sig_required -eq 0 ] && [ $ima_signed -eq 0 ] \
> +	            && [ $ima_read_policy -eq 1 ]; then
> +			log_info "No signature verification required"
> +		fi
> +
>  		log_pass "$succeed_msg"
>  	fi
>  
> @@ -136,8 +145,9 @@ kexec_file_load_test()
>  		log_pass "$failed_msg (missing IMA sig)"
>  	fi
>  
> -	if [ $pe_sig_required -eq 0 ] && [ $ima_sig_required -eq 0 ] \
> -	    && [ $ima_read_policy -eq 0 ] && [ $ima_signed -eq 0 ]; then
> +	if [ $pe_sig_required -eq 0 ] && [ $ima_appraise -eq 1 ] \
> +	    && [ $ima_sig_required -eq 0 ] && [ $ima_read_policy -eq 0 ] \
> +	    && [ $ima_signed -eq 0 ]; then
>  		log_pass "$failed_msg (possibly missing IMA sig)"
>  	fi
>  
> @@ -157,6 +167,9 @@ if [ $? -eq 0 ]; then
>  fi
>  
>  # Determine which kernel config options are enabled
> +kconfig_enabled "CONFIG_IMA_APPRAISE=y" "IMA enabled"
> +ima_appraise=$?
> +
>  kconfig_enabled "CONFIG_IMA_ARCH_POLICY=y" \
>  	"architecture specific policy enabled"
>  arch_policy=$?
> @@ -178,12 +191,6 @@ ima_sig_required=$?
>  get_secureboot_mode
>  secureboot=$?
>  
> -if [ $secureboot -eq 0 ] && [ $arch_policy -eq 0 ] && \
> -   [ $pe_sig_required -eq 0 ] && [ $ima_sig_required -eq 0 ] && \
> -   [ $ima_read_policy -eq 1 ]; then
> -	log_skip "No signature verification required"
> -fi
> -
>  # Are there pe and ima signatures
>  check_for_pesig
>  pe_signed=$?
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kexec/test_kexec_load.sh b/tools/testing/selftests/kexec/test_kexec_load.sh
> index 2a66c8897f55..49c6aa929137 100755
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/kexec/test_kexec_load.sh
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kexec/test_kexec_load.sh
> @@ -1,8 +1,8 @@
>  #!/bin/sh
>  # SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> -# Loading a kernel image via the kexec_load syscall should fail
> -# when the kernel is CONFIG_KEXEC_VERIFY_SIG enabled and the system
> -# is booted in secureboot mode.
> +#
> +# Prevent loading a kernel image via the kexec_load syscall when
> +# signatures are required.  (Dependent on CONFIG_IMA_ARCH_POLICY.)
>  
>  TEST="$0"
>  . ./kexec_common_lib.sh
> @@ -18,20 +18,28 @@ if [ $? -eq 0 ]; then
>  	log_skip "kexec_load is not enabled"
>  fi
>  
> +kconfig_enabled "CONFIG_IMA_APPRAISE=y" "IMA enabled"
> +ima_appraise=$?
> +
> +kconfig_enabled "CONFIG_IMA_ARCH_POLICY=y" \
> +	"IMA architecture specific policy enabled"
> +arch_policy=$?
> +
>  get_secureboot_mode
>  secureboot=$?
>  
> -# kexec_load should fail in secure boot mode
> +# kexec_load should fail in secure boot mode and CONFIG_IMA_ARCH_POLICY enabled
>  kexec --load $KERNEL_IMAGE > /dev/null 2>&1
>  if [ $? -eq 0 ]; then
>  	kexec --unload
> -	if [ $secureboot -eq 1 ]; then
> +	if [ $secureboot -eq 1 ] && [ $arch_policy -eq 1 ]; then
>  		log_fail "kexec_load succeeded"
> -	else
> -		log_pass "kexec_load succeeded"
> +	elif [ $ima_appraise -eq 0 -o $arch_policy -eq 0 ]; then
> +		log_info "Either IMA or the IMA arch policy is not enabled"
>  	fi
> +	log_pass "kexec_load succeeded"
>  else
> -	if [ $secureboot -eq 1 ]; then
> +	if [ $secureboot -eq 1 ] && [ $arch_policy -eq 1 ] ; then
>  		log_pass "kexec_load failed"
>  	else
>  		log_fail "kexec_load failed"
> -- 
> 2.7.5
>