| Message ID | 20201212180251.9943-5-tusharsu@linux.microsoft.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | IMA: support for measuring kernel integrity critical data | expand |
On 2020-12-12 10:02:47, Tushar Sugandhi wrote: > A new IMA policy rule is needed for the IMA hook > ima_measure_critical_data() and the corresponding func CRITICAL_DATA for > measuring the input buffer. The policy rule should ensure the buffer > would get measured only when the policy rule allows the action. The > policy rule should also support the necessary constraints (flags etc.) > for integrity critical buffer data measurements. > > Add a policy rule to define the constraints for restricting integrity > critical data measurements. > > Signed-off-by: Tushar Sugandhi <tusharsu@linux.microsoft.com> This looks nice. Thanks for the changes! Reviewed-by: Tyler Hicks <tyhicks@linux.microsoft.com> Tyler > --- > Documentation/ABI/testing/ima_policy | 2 +- > security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c | 29 ++++++++++++++++++++++++---- > 2 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/Documentation/ABI/testing/ima_policy b/Documentation/ABI/testing/ima_policy > index e35263f97fc1..6ec7daa87cba 100644 > --- a/Documentation/ABI/testing/ima_policy > +++ b/Documentation/ABI/testing/ima_policy > @@ -32,7 +32,7 @@ Description: > func:= [BPRM_CHECK][MMAP_CHECK][CREDS_CHECK][FILE_CHECK]MODULE_CHECK] > [FIRMWARE_CHECK] > [KEXEC_KERNEL_CHECK] [KEXEC_INITRAMFS_CHECK] > - [KEXEC_CMDLINE] [KEY_CHECK] > + [KEXEC_CMDLINE] [KEY_CHECK] [CRITICAL_DATA] > mask:= [[^]MAY_READ] [[^]MAY_WRITE] [[^]MAY_APPEND] > [[^]MAY_EXEC] > fsmagic:= hex value > diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c b/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c > index a09d1a41a290..d45c2dbb6d45 100644 > --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c > +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c > @@ -479,6 +479,8 @@ static bool ima_match_rule_data(struct ima_rule_entry *rule, > > opt_list = rule->keyrings; > break; > + case CRITICAL_DATA: > + return true; > default: > return false; > } > @@ -515,13 +517,19 @@ static bool ima_match_rules(struct ima_rule_entry *rule, struct inode *inode, > { > int i; > > - if (func == KEY_CHECK) { > - return (rule->flags & IMA_FUNC) && (rule->func == func) && > - ima_match_rule_data(rule, func_data, cred); > - } > if ((rule->flags & IMA_FUNC) && > (rule->func != func && func != POST_SETATTR)) > return false; > + > + switch (func) { > + case KEY_CHECK: > + case CRITICAL_DATA: > + return ((rule->func == func) && > + ima_match_rule_data(rule, func_data, cred)); > + default: > + break; > + } > + > if ((rule->flags & IMA_MASK) && > (rule->mask != mask && func != POST_SETATTR)) > return false; > @@ -1116,6 +1124,17 @@ static bool ima_validate_rule(struct ima_rule_entry *entry) > if (ima_rule_contains_lsm_cond(entry)) > return false; > > + break; > + case CRITICAL_DATA: > + if (entry->action & ~(MEASURE | DONT_MEASURE)) > + return false; > + > + if (entry->flags & ~(IMA_FUNC | IMA_UID | IMA_PCR)) > + return false; > + > + if (ima_rule_contains_lsm_cond(entry)) > + return false; > + > break; > default: > return false; > @@ -1248,6 +1267,8 @@ static int ima_parse_rule(char *rule, struct ima_rule_entry *entry) > else if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_IMA_MEASURE_ASYMMETRIC_KEYS) && > strcmp(args[0].from, "KEY_CHECK") == 0) > entry->func = KEY_CHECK; > + else if (strcmp(args[0].from, "CRITICAL_DATA") == 0) > + entry->func = CRITICAL_DATA; > else > result = -EINVAL; > if (!result) > -- > 2.17.1 >
On 2020-12-12 11:20 a.m., Tyler Hicks wrote: > On 2020-12-12 10:02:47, Tushar Sugandhi wrote: >> A new IMA policy rule is needed for the IMA hook >> ima_measure_critical_data() and the corresponding func CRITICAL_DATA for >> measuring the input buffer. The policy rule should ensure the buffer >> would get measured only when the policy rule allows the action. The >> policy rule should also support the necessary constraints (flags etc.) >> for integrity critical buffer data measurements. >> >> Add a policy rule to define the constraints for restricting integrity >> critical data measurements. >> >> Signed-off-by: Tushar Sugandhi <tusharsu@linux.microsoft.com> > > This looks nice. Thanks for the changes! > > Reviewed-by: Tyler Hicks <tyhicks@linux.microsoft.com> > > Tyler > Thanks for the detailed review on this series Tyler. We really appreciate it. ~Tushar
Hi Tushar, Please update the Subject line as, "Add policy rule support for measuring critical data". On Sat, 2020-12-12 at 10:02 -0800, Tushar Sugandhi wrote: > A new IMA policy rule is needed for the IMA hook > ima_measure_critical_data() and the corresponding func CRITICAL_DATA for > measuring the input buffer. The policy rule should ensure the buffer > would get measured only when the policy rule allows the action. The > policy rule should also support the necessary constraints (flags etc.) > for integrity critical buffer data measurements. > > Add a policy rule to define the constraints for restricting integrity > critical data measurements. > > Signed-off-by: Tushar Sugandhi <tusharsu@linux.microsoft.com> This patch does not restrict measuring critical data, but adds policy rule support for measuring critical data. please update the patch description accordingly. Other than that, Reviewed-by: Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com>
On 2020-12-24 5:48 a.m., Mimi Zohar wrote: > Hi Tushar, > > Please update the Subject line as, "Add policy rule support for > measuring critical data". > > On Sat, 2020-12-12 at 10:02 -0800, Tushar Sugandhi wrote: >> A new IMA policy rule is needed for the IMA hook >> ima_measure_critical_data() and the corresponding func CRITICAL_DATA for >> measuring the input buffer. The policy rule should ensure the buffer >> would get measured only when the policy rule allows the action. The >> policy rule should also support the necessary constraints (flags etc.) >> for integrity critical buffer data measurements. >> >> Add a policy rule to define the constraints for restricting integrity >> critical data measurements. >> >> Signed-off-by: Tushar Sugandhi <tusharsu@linux.microsoft.com> > > This patch does not restrict measuring critical data, but adds policy > rule support for measuring critical data. please update the patch > description accordingly. > Will do. Will update the patch description accordingly. > Other than that, > > Reviewed-by: Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com> > Thanks a lot for the Reviewed-by tag. :)
diff --git a/Documentation/ABI/testing/ima_policy b/Documentation/ABI/testing/ima_policy index e35263f97fc1..6ec7daa87cba 100644 --- a/Documentation/ABI/testing/ima_policy +++ b/Documentation/ABI/testing/ima_policy @@ -32,7 +32,7 @@ Description: func:= [BPRM_CHECK][MMAP_CHECK][CREDS_CHECK][FILE_CHECK]MODULE_CHECK] [FIRMWARE_CHECK] [KEXEC_KERNEL_CHECK] [KEXEC_INITRAMFS_CHECK] - [KEXEC_CMDLINE] [KEY_CHECK] + [KEXEC_CMDLINE] [KEY_CHECK] [CRITICAL_DATA] mask:= [[^]MAY_READ] [[^]MAY_WRITE] [[^]MAY_APPEND] [[^]MAY_EXEC] fsmagic:= hex value diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c b/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c index a09d1a41a290..d45c2dbb6d45 100644 --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c @@ -479,6 +479,8 @@ static bool ima_match_rule_data(struct ima_rule_entry *rule, opt_list = rule->keyrings; break; + case CRITICAL_DATA: + return true; default: return false; } @@ -515,13 +517,19 @@ static bool ima_match_rules(struct ima_rule_entry *rule, struct inode *inode, { int i; - if (func == KEY_CHECK) { - return (rule->flags & IMA_FUNC) && (rule->func == func) && - ima_match_rule_data(rule, func_data, cred); - } if ((rule->flags & IMA_FUNC) && (rule->func != func && func != POST_SETATTR)) return false; + + switch (func) { + case KEY_CHECK: + case CRITICAL_DATA: + return ((rule->func == func) && + ima_match_rule_data(rule, func_data, cred)); + default: + break; + } + if ((rule->flags & IMA_MASK) && (rule->mask != mask && func != POST_SETATTR)) return false; @@ -1116,6 +1124,17 @@ static bool ima_validate_rule(struct ima_rule_entry *entry) if (ima_rule_contains_lsm_cond(entry)) return false; + break; + case CRITICAL_DATA: + if (entry->action & ~(MEASURE | DONT_MEASURE)) + return false; + + if (entry->flags & ~(IMA_FUNC | IMA_UID | IMA_PCR)) + return false; + + if (ima_rule_contains_lsm_cond(entry)) + return false; + break; default: return false; @@ -1248,6 +1267,8 @@ static int ima_parse_rule(char *rule, struct ima_rule_entry *entry) else if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_IMA_MEASURE_ASYMMETRIC_KEYS) && strcmp(args[0].from, "KEY_CHECK") == 0) entry->func = KEY_CHECK; + else if (strcmp(args[0].from, "CRITICAL_DATA") == 0) + entry->func = CRITICAL_DATA; else result = -EINVAL; if (!result)
A new IMA policy rule is needed for the IMA hook ima_measure_critical_data() and the corresponding func CRITICAL_DATA for measuring the input buffer. The policy rule should ensure the buffer would get measured only when the policy rule allows the action. The policy rule should also support the necessary constraints (flags etc.) for integrity critical buffer data measurements. Add a policy rule to define the constraints for restricting integrity critical data measurements. Signed-off-by: Tushar Sugandhi <tusharsu@linux.microsoft.com> --- Documentation/ABI/testing/ima_policy | 2 +- security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c | 29 ++++++++++++++++++++++++---- 2 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)