linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v7 07/16] ipe: add auditing support

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: <7bd474ae-3dbe-4351-fa10-ee68e5c7267c@linux.microsoft.com>
Date:   Fri, 15 Oct 2021 12:25:45 -0700
From:   Deven Bowers <deven.desai@...ux.microsoft.com>
To:     Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>, corbet@....net,
        axboe@...nel.dk, agk@...hat.com, snitzer@...hat.com,
        ebiggers@...nel.org, tytso@....edu, paul@...l-moore.com,
        eparis@...hat.com, jmorris@...ei.org, serge@...lyn.com
Cc:     jannh@...gle.com, dm-devel@...hat.com, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-fscrypt@...r.kernel.org, linux-audit@...hat.com,
        linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v7 07/16] ipe: add auditing support

On 10/13/2021 3:54 PM, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 10/13/21 12:06 PM, deven.desai@...ux.microsoft.com wrote:
>> diff --git a/security/ipe/Kconfig b/security/ipe/Kconfig
>> index c4503083e92d..ef556b66e674 100644
>> --- a/security/ipe/Kconfig
>> +++ b/security/ipe/Kconfig
>> @@ -17,3 +17,55 @@ menuconfig SECURITY_IPE
>>         requirements on the fly.
>>           If unsure, answer N.
>> +
>> +if SECURITY_IPE
>> +
>> +choice
>> +    prompt "Hash algorithm used in auditing policies"
>> +    default IPE_AUDIT_HASH_SHA1
>> +    depends on AUDIT
>> +    help
>> +        Specify the hash algorithm used when auditing policies.
>> +        The hash is used to uniquely identify a policy from other
>> +        policies on the system.
>> +
>> +        If unsure, leave default.
>> +
>> +    config IPE_AUDIT_HASH_SHA1
>> +        bool "sha1"
>> +        depends on CRYPTO_SHA1
>> +        help
>> +            Use the SHA128 algorithm to hash policies
>> +            in the audit records.
>> +
>> +    config IPE_AUDIT_HASH_SHA256
>> +        bool "sha256"
>> +        depends on CRYPTO_SHA256
>> +        help
>> +            Use the SHA256 algorithm to hash policies
>> +            in the audit records.
>> +
>> +    config IPE_AUDIT_HASH_SHA384
>> +        bool "sha384"
>> +        depends on CRYPTO_SHA512
>> +        help
>> +            Use the SHA384 algorithm to hash policies
>> +            in the audit records
>> +
>> +    config IPE_AUDIT_HASH_SHA512
>> +        bool "sha512"
>> +        depends on CRYPTO_SHA512
>> +        help
>> +            Use the SHA512 algorithm to hash policies
>> +            in the audit records
>> +endchoice
>> +
>> +config IPE_AUDIT_HASH_ALG
>> +    string
>> +    depends on AUDIT
>> +    default "sha1" if IPE_AUDIT_HASH_SHA1
>> +    default "sha256" if IPE_AUDIT_HASH_SHA256
>> +    default "sha384" if IPE_AUDIT_HASH_SHA384
>> +    default "sha512" if IPE_AUDIT_HASH_SHA512
>> +
>> +endif
>
> Please follow coding-style for Kconfig files:
>
> (from Documentation/process/coding-style.rst, section 10):
>
> For all of the Kconfig* configuration files throughout the source tree,
> the indentation is somewhat different.  Lines under a ``config`` 
> definition
> are indented with one tab, while help text is indented an additional two
> spaces.
>
Oof. That's embarrassing. Sorry, I'll fix this for v8.

While I'm at it, is the help text required for choice configs?
checkpatch --strict complains with a warning without them, but
I see other places in the tree where help text is omitted for
these configs attached to a choice.

Documentation/process/* doesn't seem to have any guidance, nor
Documentation/kbuild/* on whether it is safe to ignore that
checkpatch warning.