linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v9 0/25] security: Move IMA and EVM to the LSM infrastructure

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: <d54ca249c3071522218c7ba7b4984bab@paul-moore.com>
Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2024 22:18:31 -0500
From: Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.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, jmorris@...ei.org, serge@...lyn.com, zohar@...ux.ibm.com, dmitry.kasatkin@...il.com, eric.snowberg@...cle.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-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...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 v9 0/25] security: Move IMA and EVM to the LSM
 infrastructure

On Jan 15, 2024 Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@...weicloud.com> wrote:
> 
> IMA and EVM are not effectively LSMs, especially due to the fact that in
> the past they could not provide a security blob while there is another LSM
> active.
> 
> That changed in the recent years, the LSM stacking feature now makes it
> possible to stack together multiple LSMs, and allows them to provide a
> security blob for most kernel objects. While the LSM stacking feature has
> some limitations being worked out, it is already suitable to make IMA and
> EVM as LSMs.
> 
> The main purpose of this patch set is to remove IMA and EVM function calls,
> hardcoded in the LSM infrastructure and other places in the kernel, and to
> register them as LSM hook implementations, so that those functions are
> called by the LSM infrastructure like other regular LSMs.

Thanks Roberto, this is looking good.  I appreciate all the work you've
put into making this happen; when I first mentioned this idea I figured
it would be something that would happen much farther into the future, I
wasn't expecting to see you pick this up and put in the work to make it
happen - thank you.

I had some pretty minor comments but I think the only thing I saw that
I think needs a change/addition is a comment in the Makefile regarding
the IMA/EVM ordering; take a look and let me know what you think.

There are also a few patches in the patchset that don't have an
ACK/review tag from Mimi, although now that you are co-maininting IMA/EVM
with Mimi I don't know if that matters.  If the two of you can let me
know how you want me to handle LSM patches that are IMA/EVM related I
would appreciate it (two ACKs, one or other, something else?).

Once you add a Makefile commane and we sort out the IMA/EVM approval
process I think we're good to get this into linux-next.  A while back
Mimi and I had a chat offline and if I recall everything correctly she
preferred that I take this patchset via the LSM tree.  I don't have a
problem with that, and to be honest I would probably prefer
that too, but I wanted to check with everyone that is still the case.
Just in case, I've added my ACKs/reviews to this patchset in case this
needs to be merged via the integrity tree.

--
paul-moore.com