linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH v3 01/10] ima: Introduce hook DIGEST_LIST

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: <D3Z3PDARWOV4.1CBB4U4NW846J@kernel.org>
Date: Fri, 06 Sep 2024 12:41:15 +0300
From: "Jarkko Sakkinen" <jarkko@...nel.org>
To: "Roberto Sassu" <roberto.sassu@...weicloud.com>, <corbet@....net>,
 <zohar@...ux.ibm.com>, <dmitry.kasatkin@...il.com>,
 <eric.snowberg@...cle.com>, <paul@...l-moore.com>, <jmorris@...ei.org>,
 <serge@...lyn.com>
Cc: <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
 <linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>,
 <wufan@...ux.microsoft.com>, <pbrobinson@...il.com>, <zbyszek@...waw.pl>,
 <hch@....de>, <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>, <pmatilai@...hat.com>,
 <jannh@...gle.com>, <dhowells@...hat.com>, <jikos@...nel.org>,
 <mkoutny@...e.com>, <ppavlu@...e.com>, <petr.vorel@...il.com>,
 <mzerqung@...inter.de>, <kgold@...ux.ibm.com>, "Roberto Sassu"
 <roberto.sassu@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH v3 01/10] ima: Introduce hook DIGEST_LIST_CHECK

On Thu Sep 5, 2024 at 6:25 PM EEST, Roberto Sassu wrote:
> From: Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@...wei.com>
>
> Introduce a new hook to check the integrity of digest lists.

"Introduce DIGEST_LIST_CHECK, a new hook..."

>
> The new hook is invoked during a kernel read with file type

"with the file type"


> READING_DIGEST LIST, which is done by the Integrity Digest Cache when it is
> populating a digest cache with a digest list.

The patch creates a new struct imap_rule_entry instance when it parses
the corresponding rule, which means that there are couple slices of
information missing here:

1. The commit message does not tell what the code change effectively
   is. I scavenged this information from [1].
2. The commit message does no effort to connect the dots between the
   effective change and the expected goal.

I'd put a lot of effort to this commit message assuming that the new
hook is at the center of the goals of this patch set.

[1] https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.10-rc4/source/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c#L1404

BR, Jarkko