[PATCH 3/4] ima: Improvements in ima_appraise_measurement()
From: Thiago Jung Bauermann <hidden>
Date: 2018-03-15 00:03:48
Also in:
linux-integrity, lkml
Hello Serge, Thanks for quickly reviewing these patches! Serge E. Hallyn [off-list ref] writes:
Quoting Thiago Jung Bauermann (bauerman at linux.vnet.ibm.com):quoted
From: Mimi Zohar <redacted>@@ -241,16 +241,20 @@ int ima_appraise_measurement(enum ima_hooks func, } status = evm_verifyxattr(dentry, XATTR_NAME_IMA, xattr_value, rc, iint); - if ((status != INTEGRITY_PASS) && - (status != INTEGRITY_PASS_IMMUTABLE) && - (status != INTEGRITY_UNKNOWN)) { - if ((status == INTEGRITY_NOLABEL) - || (status == INTEGRITY_NOXATTRS)) - cause = "missing-HMAC"; - else if (status == INTEGRITY_FAIL) - cause = "invalid-HMAC"; + switch (status) { + case INTEGRITY_PASS: + case INTEGRITY_PASS_IMMUTABLE: + case INTEGRITY_UNKNOWN:Wouldn't it be more future-proof to replace this with a 'default', or to at least add a "default: BUG()" to catch new status values?
I agree. I like the "default: BUG()" option.
quoted
+ break; + case INTEGRITY_NOXATTRS: /* No EVM protected xattrs. */ + case INTEGRITY_NOLABEL: /* No security.evm xattr. */ + cause = "missing-HMAC"; + goto out; + case INTEGRITY_FAIL: /* Invalid HMAC/signature. */ + cause = "invalid-HMAC"; goto out; } + switch (xattr_value->type) { case IMA_XATTR_DIGEST_NG: /* first byte contains algorithm id */@@ -316,17 +320,20 @@ int ima_appraise_measurement(enum ima_hooks func, integrity_audit_msg(AUDIT_INTEGRITY_DATA, inode, filename, op, cause, rc, 0); } else if (status != INTEGRITY_PASS) { + /* Fix mode, but don't replace file signatures. */ if ((ima_appraise & IMA_APPRAISE_FIX) && (!xattr_value || xattr_value->type != EVM_IMA_XATTR_DIGSIG)) { if (!ima_fix_xattr(dentry, iint)) status = INTEGRITY_PASS; - } else if ((inode->i_size == 0) && - (iint->flags & IMA_NEW_FILE) && - (xattr_value && - xattr_value->type == EVM_IMA_XATTR_DIGSIG)) { + } + + /* Permit new files with file signatures, but without data. */ + if (inode->i_size == 0 && iint->flags & IMA_NEW_FILE &&This may be correct, but it's not identical to what you're replacing. Since in either case you're setting status to INTEGRITY_PASS the final result is the same, but with a few extra possible steps. Not sure whether that matters.
Good point. I'll have to defer this one to Mimi though.
quoted
+ xattr_value && xattr_value->type == EVM_IMA_XATTR_DIGSIG) { status = INTEGRITY_PASS; } + integrity_audit_msg(AUDIT_INTEGRITY_DATA, inode, filename, op, cause, rc, 0); } else {
-- Thiago Jung Bauermann IBM Linux Technology Center -- 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