[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20240312030712.GF1182@sol.localdomain>
Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2024 20:07:12 -0700
From: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...nel.org>
To: Fan Wu <wufan@...ux.microsoft.com>
Cc: corbet@....net, zohar@...ux.ibm.com, jmorris@...ei.org,
serge@...lyn.com, tytso@....edu, axboe@...nel.dk, agk@...hat.com,
snitzer@...nel.org, eparis@...hat.com, paul@...l-moore.com,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org,
linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
linux-fscrypt@...r.kernel.org, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
dm-devel@...ts.linux.dev, audit@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Deven Bowers <deven.desai@...ux.microsoft.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v14 15/19] fsverity: consume builtin signature via
LSM hook
On Mon, Mar 11, 2024 at 07:57:12PM -0700, Eric Biggers wrote:
>
> As I've said before, this commit message needs some work. It currently doesn't
> say anything about what the patch actually does.
>
> BTW, please make sure you're Cc'ing the fsverity mailing list
> (fsverity@...ts.linux.dev), not fscrypt (linux-fscrypt@...r.kernel.org).
Also, I thought this patch was using a new LSM hook, but I now see that you're
actually abusing the existing security_inode_setsecurity() LSM hook. Currently
that hook is called when an xattr is set. I don't see any precedent for
overloading it for other purposes. This seems problematic, as it means that a
request to set an xattr with the name you chose ("fsverity.builtin-sig") will be
interpreted by LSMs as the fsverity builtin signature. A dedicated LSM hook may
be necessary to avoid issues with overloading the existing xattr hook like this.
- Eric
Powered by blists - more mailing lists