[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1559638637.3410.3.camel@HansenPartnership.com>
Date: Tue, 04 Jun 2019 11:57:17 +0300
From: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>
To: Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@...wei.com>,
Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.ibm.com>, dmitry.kasatkin@...wei.com,
mjg59@...gle.com
Cc: linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org,
linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, silviu.vlasceanu@...wei.com,
stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] ima: don't ignore INTEGRITY_UNKNOWN EVM status
On Mon, 2019-06-03 at 16:44 +0200, Roberto Sassu wrote:
> On 6/3/2019 4:31 PM, James Bottomley wrote:
> > On Mon, 2019-06-03 at 16:29 +0200, Roberto Sassu wrote:
[...]
> > > How would you prevent root in the container from updating
> > > security.ima?
> >
> > We don't. We only guarantee immutability for unprivileged
> > containers, so root can't be inside.
>
> Ok.
>
> Regarding the new behavior, this must be explicitly enabled by adding
> ima_appraise=enforce-evm or log-evm to the kernel command line.
> Otherwise, the current behavior is preserved with this patch. Would
> this be ok?
Sure, as long as it's an opt-in flag, meaning the behaviour of my
kernels on physical cloud systems doesn't change as I upgrade them, I'm
fine with that.
James
Powered by blists - more mailing lists