Re: [PATCH v8 13/19] ima: Add functions for creation and freeing of an ima_namespace
From: Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>
Date: 2022-01-14 11:43:37
Also in:
linux-integrity, lkml
On Tue, Jan 04, 2022 at 12:04:10PM -0500, Stefan Berger wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
From: Stefan Berger <stefanb@linux.ibm.com> Implement create_ima_ns() to create and initialize an ima_namespace and implement free_ima_ns() to free it. Signed-off-by: Stefan Berger <stefanb@linux.ibm.com> --- include/linux/ima.h | 13 +++++ security/integrity/ima/Makefile | 1 + security/integrity/ima/ima.h | 16 +++++++ security/integrity/ima/ima_init_ima_ns.c | 2 +- security/integrity/ima/ima_ns.c | 61 ++++++++++++++++++++++++ 5 files changed, 92 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) create mode 100644 security/integrity/ima/ima_ns.cdiff --git a/include/linux/ima.h b/include/linux/ima.h index e1d65162d1fb..06c88cb17b21 100644 --- a/include/linux/ima.h +++ b/include/linux/ima.h@@ -226,4 +226,17 @@ static inline bool ima_appraise_signature(enum kernel_read_file_id func) return false; } #endif /* CONFIG_IMA_APPRAISE && CONFIG_INTEGRITY_TRUSTED_KEYRING */ + +#ifdef CONFIG_IMA_NS + +void free_ima_ns(struct user_namespace *ns); + +#else + +static inline void free_ima_ns(struct user_namespace *user_ns) +{ +} + +#endif /* CONFIG_IMA_NS */ + #endif /* _LINUX_IMA_H */diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/Makefile b/security/integrity/ima/Makefile index f8a5e5f3975d..b86a35fbed60 100644 --- a/security/integrity/ima/Makefile +++ b/security/integrity/ima/Makefile@@ -14,6 +14,7 @@ ima-$(CONFIG_HAVE_IMA_KEXEC) += ima_kexec.o ima-$(CONFIG_IMA_BLACKLIST_KEYRING) += ima_mok.o ima-$(CONFIG_IMA_MEASURE_ASYMMETRIC_KEYS) += ima_asymmetric_keys.o ima-$(CONFIG_IMA_QUEUE_EARLY_BOOT_KEYS) += ima_queue_keys.o +ima-$(CONFIG_IMA_NS) += ima_ns.o ifeq ($(CONFIG_EFI),y) ima-$(CONFIG_IMA_SECURE_AND_OR_TRUSTED_BOOT) += ima_efi.odiff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima.h b/security/integrity/ima/ima.h index f63c6f22b853..4255301e5b96 100644 --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima.h +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima.h@@ -163,6 +163,7 @@ extern bool ima_canonical_fmt; int ima_init(void); int ima_fs_init(void); int ima_ns_init(void); +int ima_init_namespace(struct ima_namespace *ns); int ima_add_template_entry(struct ima_namespace *ns, struct ima_template_entry *entry, int violation, const char *op, struct inode *inode,@@ -503,4 +504,19 @@ static inline struct ima_namespace *get_current_ns(void) return &init_ima_ns; } +#ifdef CONFIG_IMA_NS + +struct ima_namespace *create_ima_ns(struct user_namespace *user_ns); + +#else + +static inline struct ima_namespace * +create_ima_ns(struct user_namespace *user_ns)
Why are you introducing these functions in 13/19 when you're first using it in the last patch of this series?
+{
+ WARN(1, "Cannot create an IMA namespace\n");
+ return ERR_PTR(-EFAULT);
+}
I think I pointed this out earlier or made illustrated it in my draft
patch earlier. This function should not return a ptr to an ima
namespace. That's just not necessary: the ima namespace _is stashed in
struct user namespace_:
static int create_ima_ns(struct uesr_namespace *user_ns)
{
[...]
/* Pairs with [...] */
smp_store_release(&user_ns->ima_ns, ns);
return 0;
}
and in the other case:
static inline create_ima_ns(struct user_namespace *user_ns)
{
return -EINVAL;
}