linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 4/8] ima: define a new template field 'd-type' and a new template 'ima-ngv2'

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: <YhbSE/k4mElcehDN@sol.localdomain>
Date:   Wed, 23 Feb 2022 16:32:19 -0800
From:   Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...nel.org>
To:     Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.ibm.com>
Cc:     linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org,
        Stefan Berger <stefanb@...ux.ibm.com>,
        linux-fscrypt@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 4/8] ima: define a new template field 'd-type' and a
 new template 'ima-ngv2'

On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 04:43:06PM -0500, Mimi Zohar wrote:
> In preparation to differentiate between regular IMA file hashes and
> fs-verity's file digests, define a new template field named 'd-type'.
> Define a new template named 'ima-ngv2', which includes the new 'd-type'
> field.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.ibm.com>
> ---
>  security/integrity/ima/ima_template.c     |  3 +++
>  security/integrity/ima/ima_template_lib.c | 13 +++++++++++++
>  security/integrity/ima/ima_template_lib.h |  2 ++
>  3 files changed, 18 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_template.c b/security/integrity/ima/ima_template.c
> index db1ad6d7a57f..b321342e5bee 100644
> --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_template.c
> +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_template.c
> @@ -19,6 +19,7 @@ enum header_fields { HDR_PCR, HDR_DIGEST, HDR_TEMPLATE_NAME,
>  static struct ima_template_desc builtin_templates[] = {
>  	{.name = IMA_TEMPLATE_IMA_NAME, .fmt = IMA_TEMPLATE_IMA_FMT},
>  	{.name = "ima-ng", .fmt = "d-ng|n-ng"},
> +	{.name = "ima-ngv2", .fmt = "d-ng|n-ng|d-type"},
>  	{.name = "ima-sig", .fmt = "d-ng|n-ng|sig"},
>  	{.name = "ima-buf", .fmt = "d-ng|n-ng|buf"},
>  	{.name = "ima-modsig", .fmt = "d-ng|n-ng|sig|d-modsig|modsig"},
> @@ -40,6 +41,8 @@ static const struct ima_template_field supported_fields[] = {
>  	 .field_show = ima_show_template_digest_ng},
>  	{.field_id = "n-ng", .field_init = ima_eventname_ng_init,
>  	 .field_show = ima_show_template_string},
> +	{.field_id = "d-type", .field_init = ima_eventdigest_type_init,
> +	 .field_show = ima_show_template_string},
>  	{.field_id = "sig", .field_init = ima_eventsig_init,
>  	 .field_show = ima_show_template_sig},
>  	{.field_id = "buf", .field_init = ima_eventbuf_init,

I notice that the "d-ng" field already contains both the hash algorithm and the
hash itself, in the form <algorithm>:<hash>.  Wouldn't it make more sense to
define a "d-ngv2" field that contains <type>:<algorithm>:<hash>?  After all,
both the type and algorithm are required to interpret the hash.

Or in other words, what about the hash type is different from the hash algorithm
that would result in them needing different handling here?

- Eric