lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Jan]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC 1/1] ima: digital signature verification using asymmetric keys
On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 08:48:55PM -0500, Mimi Zohar wrote:

[..]
> > Hi Mimi,
> >
> > By policy you mean ima rules here? So I can either enable default rules
> > (tcb default rules for appraisal and measurement) by using kernel command
> > line options or dynamically configure my own rules using /sysfs interface?
> >
> > If yes, AFAIK, existing inputtable policies do not allow this selective
> > mode where we do appraisal only on signed executable. That means I shall
> > have to extend the way policies can be specified so that one specify
> > that appraise only signed files?
>
> We've just added the ability of defining the method for appraising a
> file and defining rules in terms of the filesystem UUID. Extending the
> IMA policy shouldn't be a problem, but I'm not sure how you would go
> about adding support for only appraising files with digital signatures.

Hi Mimi,

Can we add another field to ima_rule_entry, say .enforcement to control
the behavior of .action. Possible values of .enforcement could be, say.

ALL
SIGNED_ONLY

ALL will be default. And with .action= MEASURE, one could possibly use
.enforcement=SIGNED_ONLY.

Thanks
Vivek


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-01-29 19:41    [W:0.045 / U:0.152 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site