Hi Alban,

On Thu, 2018-01-25 at 06:56 -0500, Mimi Zohar wrote:

quoted

quoted

@@ -228,9 +229,28 @@ static int process_measurement(struct file *file, char *buf, loff_t size,
 				 IMA_APPRAISE_SUBMASK | IMA_APPRAISED_SUBMASK |
 				 IMA_ACTION_FLAGS);
 
-	if (test_and_clear_bit(IMA_CHANGE_XATTR, &iint->atomic_flags))
-		/* reset all flags if ima_inode_setxattr was called */
+	/*
+	 * Reset the measure, appraise and audit cached flags either if:
+	 * - ima_inode_setxattr was called, or
+	 * - based on filesystem feature flag
+	 * forcing the file to be re-evaluated.
+	 */
+	if (test_and_clear_bit(IMA_CHANGE_XATTR, &iint->atomic_flags)) {
 		iint->flags &= ~IMA_DONE_MASK;
+	} else if (inode->i_sb->s_type->fs_flags & FS_IMA_NO_CACHE) {
+		if (action & IMA_MEASURE) {
+			iint->measured_pcrs = 0;
+			iint->flags &=
+			    ~(IMA_COLLECTED | IMA_MEASURE | IMA_MEASURED);
+		}
+		if (action & IMA_APPRAISE)
+			iint->flags &=
+			    ~(IMA_COLLECTED | IMA_APPRAISE | IMA_APPRAISED |
+			      IMA_APPRAISE_SUBMASK | IMA_APPRAISED_SUBMASK);
+		if (action & IMA_AUDIT)
+			iint->flags &=
+			    ~(IMA_COLLECTED | IMA_AUDIT | IMA_AUDITED);
+	}

Alban, I don't know what I was thinking, but this can be simplified
like for the IMA_CHANGE_XATTR case. ?Except in the IMA_CHANGE_XATTR
case, "measured_pcrs" was already reset, whereas in this case
"measured_pcrs" needs to be reset.

Did you get a chance to make the change and test it?

Mimi

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-security-module" in
the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html