linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v10 6/8] ima: kexec: move IMA log copy from kexec load to execute

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: <6583378c-55ee-4192-a95f-ebaf3f708bbb@linux.microsoft.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2025 15:27:44 -0700
From: steven chen <chenste@...ux.microsoft.com>
To: Baoquan He <bhe@...hat.com>
Cc: zohar@...ux.ibm.com, stefanb@...ux.ibm.com,
 roberto.sassu@...weicloud.com, roberto.sassu@...wei.com,
 eric.snowberg@...cle.com, ebiederm@...ssion.com, paul@...l-moore.com,
 code@...icks.com, bauermann@...abnow.com, linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org,
 kexec@...ts.infradead.org, linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, madvenka@...ux.microsoft.com,
 nramas@...ux.microsoft.com, James.Bottomley@...senpartnership.com,
 vgoyal@...hat.com, dyoung@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 6/8] ima: kexec: move IMA log copy from kexec load to
 execute

On 3/24/2025 4:00 AM, Baoquan He wrote:
> On 03/21/25 at 09:23am, steven chen wrote:
>> On 3/19/2025 7:06 PM, Baoquan He wrote:
>>> On 03/17/25 at 06:04pm, steven chen wrote:
>>> ...snip...
>>>> ---
>>>>    kernel/kexec_file.c                | 10 ++++++
>>>>    security/integrity/ima/ima_kexec.c | 51 ++++++++++++++++++------------
>>>>    2 files changed, 40 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/kernel/kexec_file.c b/kernel/kexec_file.c
>>>> index 606132253c79..ab449b43aaee 100644
>>>> --- a/kernel/kexec_file.c
>>>> +++ b/kernel/kexec_file.c
>>>> @@ -201,6 +201,13 @@ kimage_validate_signature(struct kimage *image)
>>>>    }
>>>>    #endif
>>>> +static void kimage_file_post_load(struct kimage *image)
>>>> +{
>>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_IMA_KEXEC
>>>> +	ima_kexec_post_load(image);
>>>> +#endif
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>>    /*
>>>>     * In file mode list of segments is prepared by kernel. Copy relevant
>>>>     * data from user space, do error checking, prepare segment list
>>>> @@ -428,6 +435,9 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE5(kexec_file_load, int, kernel_fd, int, initrd_fd,
>>>>    	kimage_terminate(image);
>>>> +	if (!(flags & KEXEC_FILE_ON_CRASH))
>>>> +		kimage_file_post_load(image);
>>> machine_kexec_post_load() is called by both kexec_load and kexec_file_load,
>>> we should use it to do things post load, but not introducing another
>>> kimage_file_post_load().
>> Hi Baoquan,
>>
>> Could you give me more detail about this?
> I mean machine_kexec_post_load() is the place where post load operations
> are done, including kexec_load and kexec_file_load. There's no need to
> specifically introduce a kimage_file_post_load() to do post load
> operaton for kexec_file_load.

Hi Baoquan,

Updating the machine_kexec_post_load() API to carry flags would indeed 
require changes to multiple files. This approach involves the condition 
check if (!(flags & KEXEC_FILE_ON_CRASH)) and ensuring that the flags 
are properly passed and handled across the relevant file

if just adding a API kimage_file_post_load() here, it is much easy and 
clean, right?

How do you think?

Thanks,

Steven