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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2021 16:28:11 -0400 From: Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.ibm.com> To: Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@...wei.com>, paul@...l-moore.com Cc: stephen.smalley.work@...il.com, prsriva02@...il.com, tusharsu@...ux.microsoft.com, nramas@...ux.microsoft.com, linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org, linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, selinux@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] ima: Return int in the functions to measure a buffer Hi Roberto, On Mon, 2021-07-05 at 11:09 +0200, Roberto Sassu wrote: > ima_measure_critical_data() and process_buffer_measurement() currently > don't return a result. A caller wouldn't be able to know whether those > functions were executed successfully. Missing is an explanation as to why these functions aren't currently returning a result. The LSM/IMA hooks only return a negative result for failure to appraise a file's integrity, not measure a file. Only failure to appraise a file's integrity results in preventing the file from being read/executed/mmaped. Other failures are only audited. > > This patch modifies the return type from void to int, and returns 0 if the > buffer has been successfully measured, a negative value otherwise. Needed here is an explanation as to why ima_measure_critical_data() is special. > > Also, this patch does not modify the behavior of existing callers by > processing the returned value. For those, the return value is ignored. I agree that the existing behavior shouldn't change, but will this result in the bots complaining? thanks, Mimi
Powered by blists - more mailing lists