linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6 00/13] Enroll kernel keys thru MOK

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <270f47e1b152a1fb8fd909ec188b5573176980fc.camel@kernel.org>
Date:   Wed, 22 Sep 2021 00:03:22 +0300
From:   Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@...nel.org>
To:     Peter Jones <pjones@...hat.com>
Cc:     Eric Snowberg <eric.snowberg@...cle.com>, keyrings@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org, zohar@...ux.ibm.com,
        dhowells@...hat.com, dwmw2@...radead.org,
        herbert@...dor.apana.org.au, davem@...emloft.net,
        jmorris@...ei.org, 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,
        "konrad.wilk@...cle.com" <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 00/13] Enroll kernel keys thru MOK

On Thu, 2021-09-16 at 18:14 -0400, Peter Jones wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 16, 2021 at 06:15:50PM +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> > On Wed, 2021-09-15 at 15:28 -0600, Eric Snowberg wrote:
> > > > On Sep 15, 2021, at 11:57 AM, Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@...nel.org> wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > On Tue, 2021-09-14 at 17:14 -0400, Eric Snowberg wrote:
> > > > > Back in 2013 Linus requested a feature to allow end-users to have the 
> > > > > ability "to add their own keys and sign modules they trust". This was
> > > > > his *second* order outlined here [1]. There have been many attempts 
> > > > > over the years to solve this problem, all have been rejected.  Many 
> > > > > of the failed attempts loaded all preboot firmware keys into the kernel,
> > > > > including the Secure Boot keys. Many distributions carry one of these 
> > > > > rejected attempts [2], [3], [4]. This series tries to solve this problem 
> > > > > with a solution that takes into account all the problems brought up in 
> > > > > the previous attempts.
> > > > > 
> > > > > On UEFI based systems, this series introduces a new Linux kernel keyring 
> > > > > containing the Machine Owner Keys (MOK) called machine. It also defines
> > > > > a new MOK variable in shim. This variable allows the end-user to decide 
> > > > > if they want to load MOK keys into the machine keyring. Mimi has suggested 
> > > > > that only CA keys contained within the MOK be loaded into the machine 
> > > > > keyring. All other certs will load into the platform keyring instead.
> > > > > 
> > > > > By default, nothing changes; MOK keys are not loaded into the machine
> > > > > keyring.  They are only loaded after the end-user makes the decision 
> > > > > themselves.  The end-user would set this through mokutil using a new 
> > > > > --trust-mok option [5]. This would work similar to how the kernel uses 
> > > > > MOK variables to enable/disable signature validation as well as use/ignore 
> > > > > the db. Any kernel operation that uses either the builtin or secondary 
> > > > > trusted keys as a trust source shall also reference the new machine 
> > > > > keyring as a trust source.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Secure Boot keys will never be loaded into the machine keyring.  They
> > > > > will always be loaded into the platform keyring.  If an end-user wanted 
> > > > > to load one, they would need to enroll it into the MOK.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Steps required by the end user:
> > > > > 
> > > > > Sign kernel module with user created key:
> > > > > $ /usr/src/kernels/$(uname -r)/scripts/sign-file sha512 \
> > > > >   machine_signing_key.priv machine_signing_key.x509 my_module.ko
> > > > > 
> > > > > Import the key into the MOK
> > > > > $ mokutil --import machine_signing_key.x509
> > > > > 
> > > > > Setup the kernel to load MOK keys into the .machine keyring
> > > > > $ mokutil --trust-mok
> > > > > 
> > > > > Then reboot, the MokManager will load and ask if you want to trust the
> > > > > MOK key and enroll the MOK into the MOKList.  Afterwards the signed kernel
> > > > > module will load.
> > > > > 
> > > > > I have included links to both the mokutil [5] and shim [6] changes I
> > > > > have made to support this new functionality.
> > > > 
> > > > How hard it is to self-compile shim and boot it with QEMU (I
> > > > do not know even the GIT location of Shim)?
> > > 
> > > It is not hard, that is the setup I use for my testing.  Upstream shim 
> > > is located here [1].  Or you can use my repo which contains the necessary
> > > changes [2].
> > > 
> > > [1] https://github.com/rhboot/shim
> > > [2] https://github.com/esnowberg/shim/tree/mokvars-v2
> > > 
> > 
> > So, my 2nd Q would be: which order these should be upstreamed?
> > 
> > Linux patch set cannot depend on "yet to be upstreamed" things.
> > 
> > Code changes look good enough to me.
> 
> We can carry this support in shim before it's in kernel.  Eric's current
> patch for shim and mokutil looks mostly reasonable, though I see a few
> minor nits we'll have to sort out.

I would revisit this patch set after there is an official shim release
out containing the new API. No  kernel patches, which depend on any
non-upstream changes, can be rightfully reviewed.

/Jarkko