linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/4] ima: define a new signature type named IMA_VERITY

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: <YaWNX3nwslG/Q2aH@sol.localdomain>
Date:   Mon, 29 Nov 2021 18:33:03 -0800
From:   Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...nel.org>
To:     Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.ibm.com>
Cc:     linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org, linux-fscrypt@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] ima: define a new signature type named
 IMA_VERITY_DIGSIG

On Mon, Nov 29, 2021 at 12:00:55PM -0500, Mimi Zohar wrote:
> To differentiate between a regular file hash and an fs-verity file digest
> based signature stored as security.ima xattr, define a new signature type
> named IMA_VERITY_DIGSIG.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.ibm.com>

For this new signature type, what bytes are actually signed?  It looks like it's
just the raw digest, which isn't sufficient since it is ambiguous.  It needs to
include information that makes it clear what the signer is actually signing,
such as "this is an fs-verity SHA-256 file digest".  See
'struct fsverity_formatted_digest' for an example of this (but it isn't
necessary to use that exact structure).

I think the existing IMA signatures have the same problem (but it is hard for me
to understand the code).  However, a new signature type doesn't have
backwards-compatibility concerns, so it could be done right.

- Eric