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]
Date:   Thu, 9 Sep 2021 11:53:14 -0600
From:   Eric Snowberg <eric.snowberg@...cle.com>
To:     Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.ibm.com>
Cc:     keyrings@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-integrity <linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org>,
        David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
        David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
        Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@...nel.org>,
        James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
        "Serge E . Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>, keescook@...omium.org,
        gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
        scott.branden@...adcom.com, weiyongjun1@...wei.com,
        nayna@...ux.ibm.com, ebiggers@...gle.com, ardb@...nel.org,
        nramas@...ux.microsoft.com, lszubowi@...hat.com,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
        James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com, pjones@...hat.com,
        "konrad.wilk@...cle.com" <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 04/12] integrity: restrict INTEGRITY_KEYRING_MACHINE to
 restrict_link_by_ca


> On Sep 9, 2021, at 11:25 AM, Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.ibm.com> wrote:
> 
> On Tue, 2021-09-07 at 12:01 -0400, Eric Snowberg wrote:
>> Set the restriction check for INTEGRITY_KEYRING_MACHINE keys to
>> restrict_link_by_ca.  This will only allow CA keys into the machine
>> keyring.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Eric Snowberg <eric.snowberg@...cle.com>
> 
> Normally the new function, in this case the restriction, and usage
> should be defined together.  Any reason why 3/12 and 4/12 are two
> separate patches?  

I split them since they cross subsystems.

> I would squash them together.

But I can squash them together in the next round.

> 
>> ---
>> v1: Initial version
>> v2: Added !IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_INTEGRITY_TRUSTED_KEYRING check so mok
>>    keyring gets created even when it isn't enabled
>> v3: Rename restrict_link_by_system_trusted_or_ca to restrict_link_by_ca
>> v4: removed unnecessary restriction->check set
>> v5: Rename to machine keyring
>> ---
>> security/integrity/digsig.c | 8 ++++++--
>> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>> 
>> diff --git a/security/integrity/digsig.c b/security/integrity/digsig.c
>> index 5a75ac2c4dbe..2b75bbbd9e0e 100644
>> --- a/security/integrity/digsig.c
>> +++ b/security/integrity/digsig.c
>> @@ -132,14 +132,18 @@ int __init integrity_init_keyring(const unsigned int id)
>> 		goto out;
>> 	}
>> 
>> -	if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_INTEGRITY_TRUSTED_KEYRING))
>> +	if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_INTEGRITY_TRUSTED_KEYRING) && id != INTEGRITY_KEYRING_MACHINE)
> 
> Over 80 chars, please split the line

I thought the 80 char limit was relaxed?  But if it hasn’t
I can change this too.  Thanks.



Powered by blists - more mailing lists