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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <5aa5986266c3a3f834114a835378455cbbff7b64.camel@linux.ibm.com> Date: Wed, 27 Dec 2023 08:22:27 -0500 From: Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.ibm.com> To: Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@...weicloud.com>, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, brauner@...nel.org, chuck.lever@...cle.com, jlayton@...nel.org, neilb@...e.de, kolga@...app.com, Dai.Ngo@...cle.com, tom@...pey.com, paul@...l-moore.com, jmorris@...ei.org, serge@...lyn.com, dmitry.kasatkin@...il.com, dhowells@...hat.com, jarkko@...nel.org, stephen.smalley.work@...il.com, eparis@...isplace.org, casey@...aufler-ca.com, shuah@...nel.org, mic@...ikod.net Cc: linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org, keyrings@...r.kernel.org, selinux@...r.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@...wei.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 23/24] ima: Make it independent from 'integrity' LSM On Thu, 2023-12-14 at 18:08 +0100, Roberto Sassu wrote: > From: Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@...wei.com> > > Make the 'ima' LSM independent from the 'integrity' LSM by introducing IMA > own integrity metadata (ima_iint_cache structure, with IMA-specific fields > from the integrity_iint_cache structure), and by managing it directly from > the 'ima' LSM. > > Move the remaining IMA-specific flags to security/integrity/ima/ima.h, > since they are now unnecessary in the common integrity layer. > > Replace integrity_iint_cache with ima_iint_cache in various places > of the IMA code. > > Then, reserve space in the security blob for the entire ima_iint_cache > structure, so that it is available for all inodes having the security blob > allocated (those for which security_inode_alloc() was called). Adjust the > IMA code accordingly, call ima_iint_inode() to retrieve the ima_iint_cache > structure. Keep the non-NULL checks since there can be inodes without > security blob. Previously the 'iint' memory was only allocated for regular files in policy and were tagged S_IMA. This patch totally changes when and how memory is being allocated. Does it make sense to allocate memory at security_inode_alloc()? Is this change really necessary for making IMA a full fledged LSM? Mimi > > Don't include the inode pointer as field in the ima_iint_cache structure, > since the association with the inode is clear. Since the inode field is > missing in ima_iint_cache, pass the extra inode parameter to > ima_get_verity_digest(). > > Finally, register ima_inode_alloc_security/ima_inode_free_security() to > initialize/deinitialize the new ima_iint_cache structure (before this task > was done by iint_init_always() and iint_free()). Also, duplicate > iint_lockdep_annotate() for the ima_iint_cache structure, and name it > ima_iint_lockdep_annotate(). > > Signed-off-by: Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@...wei.com>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists