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
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2022 12:39:32 -0500 From: Tyler Hicks <tyhicks@...ux.microsoft.com> To: Mickaël Salaün <mic@...ikod.net> Cc: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@...nel.org>, David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>, "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>, Eric Snowberg <eric.snowberg@...cle.com>, Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>, keyrings@...r.kernel.org, linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Mickaël Salaün <mic@...ux.microsoft.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] certs: Explain the rationale to call panic() On 2022-03-22 12:13:23, Mickaël Salaün wrote: > From: Mickaël Salaün <mic@...ux.microsoft.com> > > The blacklist_init() function calls panic() for memory allocation > errors. This change documents the reason why we don't return -ENODEV. > > Suggested-by: Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com> [1] > Requested-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@...nel.org> [1] > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/YjeW2r6Wv55Du0bJ@iki.fi [1] > Reviewed-by: Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com> > Reviewed-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@...nel.org> > Signed-off-by: Mickaël Salaün <mic@...ux.microsoft.com> > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220322111323.542184-2-mic@digikod.net Reviewed-by: Tyler Hicks <tyhicks@...ux.microsoft.com> Tyler > --- > > Changes since v1: > * Fix commit subject spelling spotted by David Woodhouse. > * Reword one sentence as suggested by Paul Moore. > * Add Reviewed-by Paul Moore. > * Add Reviewed-by Jarkko Sakkinen. > --- > certs/blacklist.c | 9 +++++++++ > 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/certs/blacklist.c b/certs/blacklist.c > index 486ce0dd8e9c..25094ea73600 100644 > --- a/certs/blacklist.c > +++ b/certs/blacklist.c > @@ -307,6 +307,15 @@ static int restrict_link_for_blacklist(struct key *dest_keyring, > > /* > * Initialise the blacklist > + * > + * The blacklist_init() function is registered as an initcall via > + * device_initcall(). As a result if the blacklist_init() function fails for > + * any reason the kernel continues to execute. While cleanly returning -ENODEV > + * could be acceptable for some non-critical kernel parts, if the blacklist > + * keyring fails to load it defeats the certificate/key based deny list for > + * signed modules. If a critical piece of security functionality that users > + * expect to be present fails to initialize, panic()ing is likely the right > + * thing to do. > */ > static int __init blacklist_init(void) > { > -- > 2.35.1 >
Powered by blists - more mailing lists