From patchwork Sun Nov 1 22:26:20 2020 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Tushar Sugandhi X-Patchwork-Id: 11873121 X-Patchwork-Delegate: snitzer@redhat.com Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 539B1C00A89 for ; Mon, 2 Nov 2020 07:58:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [63.128.21.124]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B094B21D91 for ; Mon, 2 Nov 2020 07:58:35 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org B094B21D91 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.microsoft.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=tempfail smtp.mailfrom=dm-devel-bounces@redhat.com Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-108-nNxHkFnqNCSprUg8rwMjTA-1; Mon, 02 Nov 2020 02:58:32 -0500 X-MC-Unique: nNxHkFnqNCSprUg8rwMjTA-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx07.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.22]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0BA5A57083; Mon, 2 Nov 2020 07:58:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from colo-mx.corp.redhat.com (colo-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.21]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E38BB10013BD; Mon, 2 Nov 2020 07:58:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists01.pubmisc.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com (lists01.pubmisc.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.19.33]) by colo-mx.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA64B8C7B5; Mon, 2 Nov 2020 07:58:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx04.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.4]) by lists01.pubmisc.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id 0A1MQfW7029347 for ; Sun, 1 Nov 2020 17:26:41 -0500 Received: by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) id 9896B2011540; Sun, 1 Nov 2020 22:26:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (mimecast03.extmail.prod.ext.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.55.19]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 945B8202450A for ; Sun, 1 Nov 2020 22:26:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from us-smtp-1.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com [205.139.110.120]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6C928811E76 for ; Sun, 1 Nov 2020 22:26:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from linux.microsoft.com (linux.microsoft.com [13.77.154.182]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-282-0eQVawQbO5eqP_GoJXkn8A-1; Sun, 01 Nov 2020 17:26:37 -0500 X-MC-Unique: 0eQVawQbO5eqP_GoJXkn8A-1 Received: from tusharsu-Ubuntu.lan (c-71-197-163-6.hsd1.wa.comcast.net [71.197.163.6]) by linux.microsoft.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id ACC7120B4907; Sun, 1 Nov 2020 14:26:35 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 linux.microsoft.com ACC7120B4907 From: Tushar Sugandhi To: zohar@linux.ibm.com, stephen.smalley.work@gmail.com, casey@schaufler-ca.com, agk@redhat.com, snitzer@redhat.com, gmazyland@gmail.com, paul@paul-moore.com Date: Sun, 1 Nov 2020 14:26:20 -0800 Message-Id: <20201101222626.6111-2-tusharsu@linux.microsoft.com> In-Reply-To: <20201101222626.6111-1-tusharsu@linux.microsoft.com> References: <20201101222626.6111-1-tusharsu@linux.microsoft.com> X-Mimecast-Impersonation-Protect: Policy=CLT - Impersonation Protection Definition; Similar Internal Domain=false; Similar Monitored External Domain=false; Custom External Domain=false; Mimecast External Domain=false; Newly Observed Domain=false; Internal User Name=false; Custom Display Name List=false; Reply-to Address Mismatch=false; Targeted Threat Dictionary=false; Mimecast Threat Dictionary=false; Custom Threat Dictionary=false X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.78 on 10.11.54.4 X-loop: dm-devel@redhat.com X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 02 Nov 2020 02:58:01 -0500 Cc: sashal@kernel.org, dm-devel@redhat.com, selinux@vger.kernel.org, jmorris@namei.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, nramas@linux.microsoft.com, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, tyhicks@linux.microsoft.com, linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org Subject: [dm-devel] [PATCH v5 1/7] IMA: generalize keyring specific measurement constructs X-BeenThere: dm-devel@redhat.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: junk List-Id: device-mapper development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: dm-devel-bounces@redhat.com Errors-To: dm-devel-bounces@redhat.com X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.84 on 10.5.11.22 Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=dm-devel-bounces@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com IMA functions such as ima_match_keyring(), process_buffer_measurement(), ima_match_policy() etc. handle data specific to keyrings. Currently, these constructs are not generic to handle any func specific data. This makes it harder to extend them without code duplication. Refactor the keyring specific measurement constructs to be generic and reusable in other measurement scenarios. Signed-off-by: Tushar Sugandhi --- security/integrity/ima/ima.h | 6 ++-- security/integrity/ima/ima_api.c | 6 ++-- security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c | 6 ++-- security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c | 49 ++++++++++++++++++----------- 4 files changed, 40 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-) diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima.h b/security/integrity/ima/ima.h index 38043074ce5e..8875085db689 100644 --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima.h +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima.h @@ -255,7 +255,7 @@ static inline void ima_process_queued_keys(void) {} int ima_get_action(struct inode *inode, const struct cred *cred, u32 secid, int mask, enum ima_hooks func, int *pcr, struct ima_template_desc **template_desc, - const char *keyring); + const char *func_data); int ima_must_measure(struct inode *inode, int mask, enum ima_hooks func); int ima_collect_measurement(struct integrity_iint_cache *iint, struct file *file, void *buf, loff_t size, @@ -267,7 +267,7 @@ void ima_store_measurement(struct integrity_iint_cache *iint, struct file *file, struct ima_template_desc *template_desc); void process_buffer_measurement(struct inode *inode, const void *buf, int size, const char *eventname, enum ima_hooks func, - int pcr, const char *keyring); + int pcr, const char *func_data); void ima_audit_measurement(struct integrity_iint_cache *iint, const unsigned char *filename); int ima_alloc_init_template(struct ima_event_data *event_data, @@ -283,7 +283,7 @@ const char *ima_d_path(const struct path *path, char **pathbuf, char *filename); int ima_match_policy(struct inode *inode, const struct cred *cred, u32 secid, enum ima_hooks func, int mask, int flags, int *pcr, struct ima_template_desc **template_desc, - const char *keyring); + const char *func_data); void ima_init_policy(void); void ima_update_policy(void); void ima_update_policy_flag(void); diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_api.c b/security/integrity/ima/ima_api.c index 4f39fb93f278..af218babd198 100644 --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_api.c +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_api.c @@ -170,7 +170,7 @@ void ima_add_violation(struct file *file, const unsigned char *filename, * @func: caller identifier * @pcr: pointer filled in if matched measure policy sets pcr= * @template_desc: pointer filled in if matched measure policy sets template= - * @keyring: keyring name used to determine the action + * @func_data: private data specific to @func, can be NULL. * * The policy is defined in terms of keypairs: * subj=, obj=, type=, func=, mask=, fsmagic= @@ -186,14 +186,14 @@ void ima_add_violation(struct file *file, const unsigned char *filename, int ima_get_action(struct inode *inode, const struct cred *cred, u32 secid, int mask, enum ima_hooks func, int *pcr, struct ima_template_desc **template_desc, - const char *keyring) + const char *func_data) { int flags = IMA_MEASURE | IMA_AUDIT | IMA_APPRAISE | IMA_HASH; flags &= ima_policy_flag; return ima_match_policy(inode, cred, secid, func, mask, flags, pcr, - template_desc, keyring); + template_desc, func_data); } /* diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c b/security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c index 2d1af8899cab..ae5da9f3339d 100644 --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c @@ -786,13 +786,13 @@ int ima_post_load_data(char *buf, loff_t size, * @eventname: event name to be used for the buffer entry. * @func: IMA hook * @pcr: pcr to extend the measurement - * @keyring: keyring name to determine the action to be performed + * @func_data: private data specific to @func, can be NULL. * * Based on policy, the buffer is measured into the ima log. */ void process_buffer_measurement(struct inode *inode, const void *buf, int size, const char *eventname, enum ima_hooks func, - int pcr, const char *keyring) + int pcr, const char *func_data) { int ret = 0; const char *audit_cause = "ENOMEM"; @@ -824,7 +824,7 @@ void process_buffer_measurement(struct inode *inode, const void *buf, int size, if (func) { security_task_getsecid(current, &secid); action = ima_get_action(inode, current_cred(), secid, 0, func, - &pcr, &template, keyring); + &pcr, &template, func_data); if (!(action & IMA_MEASURE)) return; } diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c b/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c index 9b5adeaa47fc..4edc9be62048 100644 --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c @@ -453,30 +453,44 @@ int ima_lsm_policy_change(struct notifier_block *nb, unsigned long event, } /** - * ima_match_keyring - determine whether the keyring matches the measure rule - * @rule: a pointer to a rule - * @keyring: name of the keyring to match against the measure rule + * ima_match_rule_data - determine whether the given func_data matches + * the measure rule data + * @rule: IMA policy rule + * @func_data: data to match against the measure rule data * @cred: a pointer to a credentials structure for user validation * - * Returns true if keyring matches one in the rule, false otherwise. + * Returns true if func_data matches one in the rule, false otherwise. */ -static bool ima_match_keyring(struct ima_rule_entry *rule, - const char *keyring, const struct cred *cred) +static bool ima_match_rule_data(struct ima_rule_entry *rule, + const char *func_data, + const struct cred *cred) { + const struct ima_rule_opt_list *opt_list = NULL; bool matched = false; size_t i; if ((rule->flags & IMA_UID) && !rule->uid_op(cred->uid, rule->uid)) return false; - if (!rule->keyrings) - return true; + switch (rule->func) { + case KEY_CHECK: + if (!rule->keyrings) + return true; + else + opt_list = rule->keyrings; + break; + default: + break; + } - if (!keyring) + if (!func_data) + return false; + + if (!opt_list) return false; - for (i = 0; i < rule->keyrings->count; i++) { - if (!strcmp(rule->keyrings->items[i], keyring)) { + for (i = 0; i < opt_list->count; i++) { + if (!strcmp(opt_list->items[i], func_data)) { matched = true; break; } @@ -493,20 +507,20 @@ static bool ima_match_keyring(struct ima_rule_entry *rule, * @secid: the secid of the task to be validated * @func: LIM hook identifier * @mask: requested action (MAY_READ | MAY_WRITE | MAY_APPEND | MAY_EXEC) - * @keyring: keyring name to check in policy for KEY_CHECK func + * @func_data: private data specific to @func, can be NULL. * * Returns true on rule match, false on failure. */ static bool ima_match_rules(struct ima_rule_entry *rule, struct inode *inode, const struct cred *cred, u32 secid, enum ima_hooks func, int mask, - const char *keyring) + const char *func_data) { int i; if (func == KEY_CHECK) { return (rule->flags & IMA_FUNC) && (rule->func == func) && - ima_match_keyring(rule, keyring, cred); + ima_match_rule_data(rule, func_data, cred); } if ((rule->flags & IMA_FUNC) && (rule->func != func && func != POST_SETATTR)) @@ -610,8 +624,7 @@ static int get_subaction(struct ima_rule_entry *rule, enum ima_hooks func) * @mask: requested action (MAY_READ | MAY_WRITE | MAY_APPEND | MAY_EXEC) * @pcr: set the pcr to extend * @template_desc: the template that should be used for this rule - * @keyring: the keyring name, if given, to be used to check in the policy. - * keyring can be NULL if func is anything other than KEY_CHECK. + * @func_data: private data specific to @func, can be NULL. * * Measure decision based on func/mask/fsmagic and LSM(subj/obj/type) * conditions. @@ -623,7 +636,7 @@ static int get_subaction(struct ima_rule_entry *rule, enum ima_hooks func) int ima_match_policy(struct inode *inode, const struct cred *cred, u32 secid, enum ima_hooks func, int mask, int flags, int *pcr, struct ima_template_desc **template_desc, - const char *keyring) + const char *func_data) { struct ima_rule_entry *entry; int action = 0, actmask = flags | (flags << 1); @@ -638,7 +651,7 @@ int ima_match_policy(struct inode *inode, const struct cred *cred, u32 secid, continue; if (!ima_match_rules(entry, inode, cred, secid, func, mask, - keyring)) + func_data)) continue; action |= entry->flags & IMA_ACTION_FLAGS;