[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <a293ed27094f7fa7a36f1641a9e6b17a49e26fa0.camel@linux.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2025 00:07:42 -0400
From: Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.ibm.com>
To: steven chen <chenste@...ux.microsoft.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
Cc: madvenka@...ux.microsoft.com, nramas@...ux.microsoft.com,
James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com, bhe@...hat.com,
vgoyal@...hat.com, dyoung@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 2/9] ima: define and call ima_alloc_kexec_file_buf()
On Wed, 2025-04-02 at 05:47 -0700, steven chen wrote:
> In the current implementation, the ima_dump_measurement_list() API is
> called during the kexec "load" phase, where a buffer is allocated and
> the measurement records are copied. Due to this, new events added after
> kexec load but before kexec execute are not carried over to the new kernel
> during kexec operation
Repeating this here is unnecessary.
>
> To allow the buffer allocation and population to be separated into distinct
> steps, make the function local seq_file "ima_kexec_file" to a file variable.
This change was already made in [PATCH v11 1/9] ima: rename variable the
set_file "file" to "ima_kexec_file". Please remove.
>
> Carrying the IMA measurement list across kexec requires allocating a
> buffer and copying the measurement records. Separate allocating the
> buffer and copying the measurement records into separate functions in
> order to allocate the buffer at kexec 'load' and copy the measurements
> at kexec 'execute'.
>
> Signed-off-by: Tushar Sugandhi <tusharsu@...ux.microsoft.com>
> Signed-off-by: steven chen <chenste@...ux.microsoft.com>
> ---
> security/integrity/ima/ima_kexec.c | 46 +++++++++++++++++++++++-------
> 1 file changed, 35 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_kexec.c b/security/integrity/ima/ima_kexec.c
> index 650beb74346c..b12ac3619b8f 100644
> --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_kexec.c
> +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_kexec.c
> @@ -15,26 +15,46 @@
> #include "ima.h"
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_IMA_KEXEC
> +static struct seq_file ima_kexec_file;
> +
> +static void ima_free_kexec_file_buf(struct seq_file *sf)
> +{
> + vfree(sf->buf);
> + sf->buf = NULL;
> + sf->size = 0;
> + sf->read_pos = 0;
> + sf->count = 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int ima_alloc_kexec_file_buf(size_t segment_size)
> +{
> + ima_free_kexec_file_buf(&ima_kexec_file);
After moving the vfree() here at this stage in the patch set, the IMA
measurement list fails to verify when doing two consecutive "kexec -s -l"
with/without a "kexec -s -u" in between. Only after "ima: kexec: move IMA log
copy from kexec load to execute" the IMA measurement list verifies properly with
the vfree() here.
> +
> + /* segment size can't change between kexec load and execute */
> + ima_kexec_file.buf = vmalloc(segment_size);
> + if (!ima_kexec_file.buf)
> + return -ENOMEM;
> +
> + ima_kexec_file.size = segment_size;
> + ima_kexec_file.read_pos = 0;
> + ima_kexec_file.count = sizeof(struct ima_kexec_hdr); /* reserved space */
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
Powered by blists - more mailing lists