linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 6/7] IMA: add critical

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: <4c568853-1e26-0a7b-f83b-022622e46031@linux.microsoft.com>
Date:   Mon, 9 Nov 2020 09:24:04 -0800
From:   Lakshmi Ramasubramanian <nramas@...ux.microsoft.com>
To:     Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Tushar Sugandhi <tusharsu@...ux.microsoft.com>,
        stephen.smalley.work@...il.com, casey@...aufler-ca.com,
        agk@...hat.com, snitzer@...hat.com, gmazyland@...il.com,
        paul@...l-moore.com
Cc:     tyhicks@...ux.microsoft.com, sashal@...nel.org, jmorris@...ei.org,
        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 v5 6/7] IMA: add critical_data to the built-in policy
 rules

On 11/8/20 7:46 AM, Mimi Zohar wrote:
> Hi Lakshmi,
> 
> On Fri, 2020-11-06 at 15:51 -0800, Lakshmi Ramasubramanian wrote:
>>
>>>>> diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c
>>>>> b/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c
>>>>> index ec99e0bb6c6f..dc8fe969d3fe 100644
>>>>> --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c
>>>>> +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c
>>>>
>>>>> @@ -875,6 +884,29 @@ void __init ima_init_policy(void)
>>>>>                  ARRAY_SIZE(default_appraise_rules),
>>>>>                  IMA_DEFAULT_POLICY);
>>>>> +    if (ima_use_critical_data) {
>>>>> +        template = lookup_template_desc("ima-buf");
>>>>> +        if (!template) {
>>>>> +            ret = -EINVAL;
>>>>> +            goto out;
>>>>> +        }
>>>>> +
>>>>> +        ret = template_desc_init_fields(template->fmt,
>>>>> +                        &(template->fields),
>>>>> +                        &(template->num_fields));
>>>>
>>>> The default IMA template when measuring buffer data is "ima_buf".   Is
>>>> there a reason for allocating and initializing it here and not
>>>> deferring it until process_buffer_measurement()?
>>>>
>>>
>>> You are right - good catch.
>>> I will remove the above and validate.
>>>
>>
>> process_buffer_measurement() allocates and initializes "ima-buf"
>> template only when the parameter "func" is NONE. Currently, only
>> ima_check_blacklist() passes NONE for func when calling
>> process_buffer_measurement().
>>
>> If "func" is anything other than NONE, ima_match_policy() picks
>> the default IMA template if the IMA policy rule does not specify a template.
>>
>> We need to add "ima-buf" in the built-in policy for critical_data so
>> that the default template is not used for buffer measurement.
>>
>> Please let me know if I am missing something.
>>
> 
> Let's explain a bit further what is happening and why.   As you said
> ima_get_action() returns the template format, which may be the default
> IMA template or the specific IMA policy rule template format.  This
> works properly for both the arch specific and custom policies, but not
> for builtin policies, because the policy rules may contain a rule
> specific .template field.   When the rules don't contain a rule
> specific template field, they default to the IMA default template.  In
> the case of builtin policies, the policy rules cannot contain the
> .template field.
> 
> The default template field for process_buffer_measurement() should
> always be "ima-buf", not the default IMA template format.   Let's fix
> this prior to this patch.
> 
> Probably something like this:
> - In addition to initializing the default IMA template, initialize the
> "ima-buf" template.  Maybe something similiar to
> ima_template_desc_current().
> - Set the default in process_buffer_measurement() to "ima-buf", before
> calling ima_get_action().
> - modify ima_match_policy() so that the default policy isn't reset when
> already specified.
> 

Sure Mimi - I will try this out and update.

thanks,
  -lakshmi

> 
> 
>>>>
>>>>> +        if (ret)
>>>>> +            goto out;
>>>>> +
>>>>> +        critical_data_rules[0].template = template;
>>>>> +        add_rules(critical_data_rules,
>>>>> +              ARRAY_SIZE(critical_data_rules),
>>>>> +              IMA_DEFAULT_POLICY);
>>>>> +    }
>>>>> +
>>>>> +out:
>>>>> +    if (ret)
>>>>> +        pr_err("%s failed, result: %d\n", __func__, ret);
>>>>> +
>>>>>        ima_update_policy_flag();
>>>>>    }
>>>>
>>>
>>