linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 2/8] ima: Switch to ima_hash

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: <1580935285.5585.297.camel@linux.ibm.com>
Date:   Wed, 05 Feb 2020 15:41:25 -0500
From:   Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.ibm.com>
To:     Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@...wei.com>,
        James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com,
        jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com
Cc:     linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, silviu.vlasceanu@...wei.com,
        stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/8] ima: Switch to ima_hash_algo for boot aggregate

On Wed, 2020-02-05 at 11:33 +0100, Roberto Sassu wrote:
> boot_aggregate is the first entry of IMA measurement list. Its purpose is
> to link pre-boot measurements to IMA measurements. As IMA was designed to
> work with a TPM 1.2, the SHA1 PCR bank was always selected.
> 
> Currently, even if a TPM 2.0 is used, the SHA1 PCR bank is selected.
> However, the assumption that the SHA1 PCR bank is always available is not
> correct, as PCR banks can be selected with the PCR_Allocate() TPM command.
> 
> This patch tries to use ima_hash_algo as hash algorithm for boot_aggregate.
> If no PCR bank uses that algorithm, the patch tries to find the SHA256 PCR
> bank (which is mandatory in the TCG PC Client specification). If also this
> bank is not found, the patch selects the first one. If the TPM algorithm
> of that bank is not mapped to a crypto ID, boot_aggregate is set to zero.
> 
> Changelog
> 
> v1:
> - add Mimi's comments
> - if there is no PCR bank for the IMA default algorithm use SHA256 or the
>   first bank (suggested by James Bottomley)

If the IMA default hash algorithm is not enabled, James' comment was
to use SHA256 for TPM 2.0 and SHA1 for TPM 1.2.  I don't remember him
saying anything about using the first bank, that was in v1 of my
patch.  Please refer to v2 of my patch, based on James' comments.

> 
> Reported-by: Jerry Snitselaar <jsnitsel@...hat.com>
> Suggested-by: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>
> Signed-off-by: Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@...wei.com>
> Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org
> ---
>  security/integrity/ima/ima_crypto.c | 45 +++++++++++++++++++++++++----
>  security/integrity/ima/ima_init.c   | 22 ++++++++++----
>  2 files changed, 56 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_crypto.c b/security/integrity/ima/ima_crypto.c
> index 73044fc6a952..f2f41a2bc3d4 100644
> --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_crypto.c
> +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_crypto.c
> @@ -655,18 +655,29 @@ static void __init ima_pcrread(u32 idx, struct tpm_digest *d)
>  }
>  
>  /*
> - * Calculate the boot aggregate hash
> + * The boot_aggregate is a cumulative hash over TPM registers 0 - 7.  With
> + * TPM 1.2 the boot_aggregate was based on reading the SHA1 PCRs, but with
> + * TPM 2.0 hash agility, TPM chips could support multiple TPM PCR banks,
> + * allowing firmware to configure and enable different banks.
> + *
> + * Knowing which TPM bank is read to calculate the boot_aggregate digest
> + * needs to be conveyed to a verifier.  For this reason, use the same
> + * hash algorithm for reading the TPM PCRs as for calculating the boot
> + * aggregate digest as stored in the measurement list.
>   */
> -static int __init ima_calc_boot_aggregate_tfm(char *digest,
> +static int __init ima_calc_boot_aggregate_tfm(char *digest, u16 alg_id,
>  					      struct crypto_shash *tfm)
>  {
> -	struct tpm_digest d = { .alg_id = TPM_ALG_SHA1, .digest = {0} };
> +	struct tpm_digest d = { .alg_id = alg_id, .digest = {0} };
>  	int rc;
>  	u32 i;
>  	SHASH_DESC_ON_STACK(shash, tfm);
>  
>  	shash->tfm = tfm;
>  
> +	pr_devel("calculating the boot-aggregate based on TPM bank: %04x\n",
> +		 d.alg_id);
> +

Good

>  	rc = crypto_shash_init(shash);
>  	if (rc != 0)
>  		return rc;
> @@ -675,7 +686,8 @@ static int __init ima_calc_boot_aggregate_tfm(char *digest,
>  	for (i = TPM_PCR0; i < TPM_PCR8; i++) {
>  		ima_pcrread(i, &d);
>  		/* now accumulate with current aggregate */
> -		rc = crypto_shash_update(shash, d.digest, TPM_DIGEST_SIZE);
> +		rc = crypto_shash_update(shash, d.digest,
> +					 crypto_shash_digestsize(tfm));
>  	}
>  	if (!rc)
>  		crypto_shash_final(shash, digest);
> @@ -685,14 +697,35 @@ static int __init ima_calc_boot_aggregate_tfm(char *digest,
>  int __init ima_calc_boot_aggregate(struct ima_digest_data *hash)
>  {
> 
< snip >
>  
>  	hash->length = crypto_shash_digestsize(tfm);
> -	rc = ima_calc_boot_aggregate_tfm(hash->digest, tfm);
> +	alg_id = ima_tpm_chip->allocated_banks[bank_idx].alg_id;
> +	rc = ima_calc_boot_aggregate_tfm(hash->digest, alg_id, tfm);

Sure, backporting this change to ima_calc_boot_aggregate_tfm() should
be fine.

Mimi

>  	ima_free_tfm(tfm);
>