linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 2/9] ima: efi: Drop unnecessary check for CONFIG_MODULE_SIG/CONFIG_KEXEC

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: <edeb23e7884e94006d560898b7f9d2dd257a275e.camel@linux.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 14 May 2025 13:37:51 -0400
From: Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.ibm.com>
To: Thomas Weißschuh <linux@...ssschuh.net>,
        Masahiro
 Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>,
        Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>, Arnd
 Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>,
        Petr Pavlu
 <petr.pavlu@...e.com>,
        Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@...gle.com>,
        Daniel
 Gomez <da.gomez@...sung.com>, Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>,
        James
 Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
        "Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>,
        Jonathan
 Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        Madhavan Srinivasan <maddy@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Michael
 Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
        Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>,
        Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>,
        Naveen N Rao
 <naveen@...nel.org>,
        Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@...wei.com>,
        Dmitry
 Kasatkin <dmitry.kasatkin@...il.com>,
        Eric Snowberg
 <eric.snowberg@...cle.com>,
        Nicolas Schier <nicolas.schier@...ux.dev>
Cc: Fabian Grünbichler <f.gruenbichler@...xmox.com>,
        Arnout Engelen <arnout@...t.net>, Mattia Rizzolo <mattia@...reri.org>,
        kpcyrd <kpcyrd@...hlinux.org>, Christian Heusel <christian@...sel.eu>,
        Câju Mihai-Drosi <mcaju95@...il.com>,
        linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, linux-modules@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
        linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/9] ima: efi: Drop unnecessary check for
 CONFIG_MODULE_SIG/CONFIG_KEXEC_SIG

On Wed, 2025-05-14 at 11:09 -0400, Mimi Zohar wrote:
> On Tue, 2025-04-29 at 15:04 +0200, Thomas Weißschuh wrote:
> > When configuration settings are disabled the guarded functions are
> > defined as empty stubs, so the check is unnecessary.
> > The specific configuration option for set_module_sig_enforced() is
> > about to change and removing the checks avoids some later churn.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <linux@...ssschuh.net>
> > 
> > ---
> > This patch is not strictly necessary right now, but makes looking for
> > usages of CONFIG_MODULE_SIG easier.
> > ---
> >  security/integrity/ima/ima_efi.c | 6 ++----
> >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_efi.c b/security/integrity/ima/ima_efi.c
> > index
> > 138029bfcce1e40ef37700c15e30909f6e9b4f2d..a35dd166ad47beb4a7d46cc3e8fc604f57e03ecb
> > 100644
> > --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_efi.c
> > +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_efi.c
> > @@ -68,10 +68,8 @@ static const char * const sb_arch_rules[] = {
> >  const char * const *arch_get_ima_policy(void)
> >  {
> >  	if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_IMA_ARCH_POLICY) && arch_ima_get_secureboot()) {
> > -		if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_MODULE_SIG))
> > -			set_module_sig_enforced();
> > -		if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_KEXEC_SIG))
> > -			set_kexec_sig_enforced();
> > +		set_module_sig_enforced();
> > +		set_kexec_sig_enforced();
> >  		return sb_arch_rules;
> 
> Hi Thomas,
> 
> I'm just getting to looking at this patch set.  Sorry for the delay.
> 
> Testing whether CONFIG_MODULE_SIG and CONFIG_KEXEC_SIG are configured gives priority
> to them, rather than to the IMA support.  Without any other changes, both signature
> verifications would be enforced.  Is that the intention?

Never mind, got it.

Reviewed-by: Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.ibm.com>