[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <acdb1f9f-0c5f-1fdf-d53d-95ebafdd4b62@linux.microsoft.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2020 15:39:29 -0700
From: Tushar Sugandhi <tusharsu@...ux.microsoft.com>
To: Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.ibm.com>, stephen.smalley.work@...il.com,
casey@...aufler-ca.com, agk@...hat.com, snitzer@...hat.com,
gmazyland@...il.com
Cc: tyhicks@...ux.microsoft.com, sashal@...nel.org, jmorris@...ei.org,
nramas@...ux.microsoft.com, linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org,
selinux@...r.kernel.org, linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, dm-devel@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/6] IMA: conditionally allow empty rule data
On 2020-10-22 1:38 p.m., Mimi Zohar wrote:
> Hi Tushar,
>
> On Wed, 2020-09-23 at 12:20 -0700, Tushar Sugandhi wrote:
>> ima_match_rule_data() permits the func to pass empty func_data.
>> For instance, for the following func, the func_data keyrings= is
>> optional.
>> measure func=KEY_CHECK keyrings=.ima
>>
>> But a new func in future may want to constrain the func_data to
>> be non-empty. ima_match_rule_data() should support this constraint
>> and it shouldn't be hard-coded in ima_match_rule_data().
>>
>> Update ima_match_rule_data() to conditionally allow empty func_data
>> for the func that needs it.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Tushar Sugandhi <tusharsu@...ux.microsoft.com>
>
> Policy rules may constrain what is measured, but that decision should
> be left to the system owner or admin.
>
> Mimi
>
Agreed. As you mentioned in the patch 5/6 of this series,
I will get rid of this patch.
~Tushar
Powered by blists - more mailing lists