Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH v9 1/8] IMA: generalize keyring specific measurement constructs | From | Tushar Sugandhi <> | Date | Tue, 5 Jan 2021 10:48:57 -0800 |
| |
Hello Mimi, Sorry for the late response. I was on vacation last week.
On 2020-12-24 5:06 a.m., Mimi Zohar wrote: > On Sat, 2020-12-12 at 10:02 -0800, Tushar Sugandhi wrote: >> >> diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c b/security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c >> index 68956e884403..e76ef4bfd0f4 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. > > This can be simplified to "func specific data, may be NULL". Please > update in all places. > Ok, will do. >> * >> * 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"; >> @@ -831,7 +831,7 @@ 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 823a0c1379cb..a09d1a41a290 100644 >> --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c >> +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c >> @@ -453,30 +453,41 @@ 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 > > After the function_name is a brief description of the function, which > should not span multiple lines. Refer to Documentation/doc- > guide/kernel-doc.rst for details. > > Please trim the function description to: > determine whether func_data matches the policy rule > Thanks, will do.
>> + * @rule: IMA policy rule > > This patch should be limited to renaming "keyring" to "func_data". It > shouldn't make other changes, even simple ones like this. > Agreed. I will revert the rule description to the old one. >> + * @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; >> + >> + opt_list = rule->keyrings; >> + break; >> + default: >> + return false; >> + } >> >> - if (!keyring) >> + if (!func_data) >> 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 +504,20 @@ 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. > > Update as previously suggested. > Yes. >> * >> * 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 +621,7 @@ 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. > > And again here. > Yes. > thanks, > > Mimi >
Thanks, Tushar
| |