Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] IMA: Add log statements for failure conditions. | From | Tushar Sugandhi <> | Date | Wed, 12 Feb 2020 14:30:26 -0800 |
| |
On 2020-02-12 6:47 a.m., Mimi Zohar wrote: > Hi Tushar, > > Please remove the period at the end of the Subject line. Thanks. I will fix it in the next iteration. > > On Tue, 2020-02-11 at 15:14 -0800, Tushar Sugandhi wrote: >> process_buffer_measurement() does not have log messages for failure >> conditions. >> >> This change adds a log statement in the above function. > > I agree some form of notification needs to be added. The question is > whether the failure should be audited or a kernel message emitted. > IMA emits audit messages (integrity_audit_msg) for a number of > reasons - on failure to calculate a file hash, invalid policy rules, > failure to communicate with the TPM, signature verification errors, > etc. I believe both IMA audit messages and kernel message should be emitted - for better discoverability and diagnosability. > >> >> Signed-off-by: Tushar Sugandhi <tusharsu@linux.microsoft.com> >> Reviewed-by: Lakshmi Ramasubramanian <nramas@linux.microsoft.com> >> Suggested-by: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> >> --- >> security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c | 3 +++ >> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c b/security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c >> index 9fe949c6a530..6e1576d9eb48 100644 >> --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c >> +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c >> @@ -757,6 +757,9 @@ void process_buffer_measurement(const void *buf, int size, >> ima_free_template_entry(entry); >> >> out: >> + if (ret < 0) >> + pr_err("%s: failed, result: %d\n", __func__, ret); >> + >> return; >> } >> > > With 3/3 "IMA: Add module name and base name prefix to log", the > resulting message will be "KBUILD_MODNAME: KBUILD_BASENAME: func:". > Isn't that a bit much? > For this specific message, it will look like below. "ima: ima_main: process_buffer_measurement: failed, result: %d"
In general, adding KBUILD_BASENAME seems helpful to pinpoint the location of the issue.
> Mimi >
| |