Re: [PATCH v3 21/22] ima: measure and appraise the IMA policy itself

2016-02-10 Thread Dmitry Kasatkin 
On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 9:06 PM, Mimi Zohar  wrote:
> Add support for measuring and appraising the IMA policy itself.
>
> Signed-off-by: Mimi Zohar 

Acked-by: Dmitry Kasatkin 

But from Documentation/CodingStyle

if (condition)
do_this();
else
do_that();

This does not apply if only one branch of a conditional statement is a single
statement; in the latter case use braces in both branches:

if (condition) {
 do_this();
 do_that();
} else {
 otherwise();
}


You have similar issue in other patches as well...

Dmitry

> ---
>  security/integrity/ima/ima.h|  2 ++
>  security/integrity/ima/ima_fs.c |  9 -
>  security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c   |  3 +++
>  security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c | 10 +-
>  4 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima.h b/security/integrity/ima/ima.h
> index 832e62a..6685968 100644
> --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima.h
> +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima.h
> @@ -149,6 +149,7 @@ enum ima_hooks {
> FIRMWARE_CHECK,
> KEXEC_CHECK,
> INITRAMFS_CHECK,
> +   POLICY_CHECK,
> MAX_CHECK
>  };
>
> @@ -191,6 +192,7 @@ int ima_policy_show(struct seq_file *m, void *v);
>  #define IMA_APPRAISE_LOG   0x04
>  #define IMA_APPRAISE_MODULES   0x08
>  #define IMA_APPRAISE_FIRMWARE  0x10
> +#define IMA_APPRAISE_POLICY0x20
>
>  #ifdef CONFIG_IMA_APPRAISE
>  int ima_appraise_measurement(enum ima_hooks func,
> diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_fs.c b/security/integrity/ima/ima_fs.c
> index 00ccd67..7b15e80 100644
> --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_fs.c
> +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_fs.c
> @@ -325,7 +325,14 @@ static ssize_t ima_write_policy(struct file *file, const 
> char __user *buf,
>
> if (data[0] == '/')
> result = ima_read_policy(data);
> -   else
> +   else if (ima_appraise & IMA_APPRAISE_POLICY) {
> +   pr_err("IMA: signed policy required\n");
> +   integrity_audit_msg(AUDIT_INTEGRITY_STATUS, NULL, NULL,
> +   "policy_update", "signed policy required",
> +   1, 0);
> +   if (ima_appraise & IMA_APPRAISE_ENFORCE)
> +   result = -EACCES;
> +   } else
> result = ima_parse_add_rule(data);
> mutex_unlock(_write_mutex);
>  out_free:
> diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c 
> b/security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c
> index ccf9526..497a6f2 100644
> --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c
> +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c
> @@ -386,6 +386,9 @@ int ima_post_read_file(struct file *file, void *buf, 
> loff_t size,
> case READING_KEXEC_INITRAMFS:
> func = INITRAMFS_CHECK;
> break;
> +   case READING_POLICY:
> +   func = POLICY_CHECK;
> +   break;
> default:
> func = FILE_CHECK;
> break;
> diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c 
> b/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c
> index d02560e..39a811a 100644
> --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c
> +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c
> @@ -114,6 +114,7 @@ static struct ima_rule_entry default_measurement_rules[] 
> = {
>  .uid = GLOBAL_ROOT_UID, .flags = IMA_FUNC | IMA_INMASK | IMA_UID},
> {.action = MEASURE, .func = MODULE_CHECK, .flags = IMA_FUNC},
> {.action = MEASURE, .func = FIRMWARE_CHECK, .flags = IMA_FUNC},
> +   {.action = MEASURE, .func = POLICY_CHECK, .flags = IMA_FUNC},
>  };
>
>  static struct ima_rule_entry default_appraise_rules[] = {
> @@ -616,6 +617,8 @@ static int ima_parse_rule(char *rule, struct 
> ima_rule_entry *entry)
> entry->func = KEXEC_CHECK;
> else if (strcmp(args[0].from, "INITRAMFS_CHECK") == 0)
> entry->func = INITRAMFS_CHECK;
> +   else if (strcmp(args[0].from, "POLICY_CHECK") == 0)
> +   entry->func = POLICY_CHECK;
> else
> result = -EINVAL;
> if (!result)
> @@ -774,6 +777,8 @@ static int ima_parse_rule(char *rule, struct 
> ima_rule_entry *entry)
> temp_ima_appraise |= IMA_APPRAISE_MODULES;
> else if (entry->func == FIRMWARE_CHECK)
> temp_ima_appraise |= IMA_APPRAISE_FIRMWARE;
> +   else if (entry->func == POLICY_CHECK)
> +   temp_ima_appraise |= IMA_APPRAISE_POLICY;
> audit_log_format(ab, "res=%d", !result);
> audit_log_end(ab);
> return result;
> @@ -860,7 +865,7 @@ static char *mask_tokens[] = {
>  enum {
> func_file = 0, func_mmap, func_bprm,
> func_module, func_firmware, func_post,
> -   func_kexec, func_initramfs
> +   func_kexec, func_initramfs,

Re: [PATCH v3 21/22] ima: measure and appraise the IMA policy itself

2016-02-10 Thread Mimi Zohar 
On Wed, 2016-02-10 at 22:22 +0200, Dmitry Kasatkin wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 9:06 PM, Mimi Zohar  wrote:
> > Add support for measuring and appraising the IMA policy itself.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Mimi Zohar 
> 
> Acked-by: Dmitry Kasatkin 
> 
> But from Documentation/CodingStyle
> 
> if (condition)
> do_this();
> else
> do_that();
> 
> This does not apply if only one branch of a conditional statement is a single
> statement; in the latter case use braces in both branches:
> 
> if (condition) {
>  do_this();
>  do_that();
> } else {
>  otherwise();
> }
> 
> 
> You have similar issue in other patches as well...
> 
> Dmitry

Ok, I'll find and fix them.  Thank you for the review!

Mimi


___
kexec mailing list
kexec@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec

Re: [PATCH v3 21/22] ima: measure and appraise the IMA policy itself

2016-02-07 Thread Petko Manolov 
On 16-02-03 14:06:29, Mimi Zohar wrote:
> Add support for measuring and appraising the IMA policy itself.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Mimi Zohar 

Acked-by: Petko Manolov 

> ---
>  security/integrity/ima/ima.h|  2 ++
>  security/integrity/ima/ima_fs.c |  9 -
>  security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c   |  3 +++
>  security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c | 10 +-
>  4 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima.h b/security/integrity/ima/ima.h
> index 832e62a..6685968 100644
> --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima.h
> +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima.h
> @@ -149,6 +149,7 @@ enum ima_hooks {
>   FIRMWARE_CHECK,
>   KEXEC_CHECK,
>   INITRAMFS_CHECK,
> + POLICY_CHECK,
>   MAX_CHECK
>  };
>  
> @@ -191,6 +192,7 @@ int ima_policy_show(struct seq_file *m, void *v);
>  #define IMA_APPRAISE_LOG 0x04
>  #define IMA_APPRAISE_MODULES 0x08
>  #define IMA_APPRAISE_FIRMWARE0x10
> +#define IMA_APPRAISE_POLICY  0x20
>  
>  #ifdef CONFIG_IMA_APPRAISE
>  int ima_appraise_measurement(enum ima_hooks func,
> diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_fs.c b/security/integrity/ima/ima_fs.c
> index 00ccd67..7b15e80 100644
> --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_fs.c
> +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_fs.c
> @@ -325,7 +325,14 @@ static ssize_t ima_write_policy(struct file *file, const 
> char __user *buf,
>  
>   if (data[0] == '/')
>   result = ima_read_policy(data);
> - else
> + else if (ima_appraise & IMA_APPRAISE_POLICY) {
> + pr_err("IMA: signed policy required\n");
> + integrity_audit_msg(AUDIT_INTEGRITY_STATUS, NULL, NULL,
> + "policy_update", "signed policy required",
> + 1, 0);
> + if (ima_appraise & IMA_APPRAISE_ENFORCE)
> + result = -EACCES;
> + } else
>   result = ima_parse_add_rule(data);
>   mutex_unlock(_write_mutex);
>  out_free:
> diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c 
> b/security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c
> index ccf9526..497a6f2 100644
> --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c
> +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c
> @@ -386,6 +386,9 @@ int ima_post_read_file(struct file *file, void *buf, 
> loff_t size,
>   case READING_KEXEC_INITRAMFS:
>   func = INITRAMFS_CHECK;
>   break;
> + case READING_POLICY:
> + func = POLICY_CHECK;
> + break;
>   default:
>   func = FILE_CHECK;
>   break;
> diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c 
> b/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c
> index d02560e..39a811a 100644
> --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c
> +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c
> @@ -114,6 +114,7 @@ static struct ima_rule_entry default_measurement_rules[] 
> = {
>.uid = GLOBAL_ROOT_UID, .flags = IMA_FUNC | IMA_INMASK | IMA_UID},
>   {.action = MEASURE, .func = MODULE_CHECK, .flags = IMA_FUNC},
>   {.action = MEASURE, .func = FIRMWARE_CHECK, .flags = IMA_FUNC},
> + {.action = MEASURE, .func = POLICY_CHECK, .flags = IMA_FUNC},
>  };
>  
>  static struct ima_rule_entry default_appraise_rules[] = {
> @@ -616,6 +617,8 @@ static int ima_parse_rule(char *rule, struct 
> ima_rule_entry *entry)
>   entry->func = KEXEC_CHECK;
>   else if (strcmp(args[0].from, "INITRAMFS_CHECK") == 0)
>   entry->func = INITRAMFS_CHECK;
> + else if (strcmp(args[0].from, "POLICY_CHECK") == 0)
> + entry->func = POLICY_CHECK;
>   else
>   result = -EINVAL;
>   if (!result)
> @@ -774,6 +777,8 @@ static int ima_parse_rule(char *rule, struct 
> ima_rule_entry *entry)
>   temp_ima_appraise |= IMA_APPRAISE_MODULES;
>   else if (entry->func == FIRMWARE_CHECK)
>   temp_ima_appraise |= IMA_APPRAISE_FIRMWARE;
> + else if (entry->func == POLICY_CHECK)
> + temp_ima_appraise |= IMA_APPRAISE_POLICY;
>   audit_log_format(ab, "res=%d", !result);
>   audit_log_end(ab);
>   return result;
> @@ -860,7 +865,7 @@ static char *mask_tokens[] = {
>  enum {
>   func_file = 0, func_mmap, func_bprm,
>   func_module, func_firmware, func_post,
> - func_kexec, func_initramfs
> + func_kexec, func_initramfs, func_policy
>  };
>  
>  static char *func_tokens[] = {
> @@ -940,6 +945,9 @@ static void policy_func_show(struct seq_file *m, enum 
> ima_hooks func)
>   case INITRAMFS_CHECK:
>   seq_printf(m, pt(Opt_func), ft(func_initramfs));
>   break;
> + case POLICY_CHECK:
> + seq_printf(m, pt(Opt_func), ft(func_policy));
> + break;
>   default:
>   snprintf(tbuf, sizeof(tbuf), "%d", func);
>   seq_printf(m, pt(Opt_func), tbuf);

[PATCH v3 21/22] ima: measure and appraise the IMA policy itself

2016-02-03 Thread Mimi Zohar 
Add support for measuring and appraising the IMA policy itself.

Signed-off-by: Mimi Zohar 
---
 security/integrity/ima/ima.h|  2 ++
 security/integrity/ima/ima_fs.c |  9 -
 security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c   |  3 +++
 security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c | 10 +-
 4 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima.h b/security/integrity/ima/ima.h
index 832e62a..6685968 100644
--- a/security/integrity/ima/ima.h
+++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima.h
@@ -149,6 +149,7 @@ enum ima_hooks {
FIRMWARE_CHECK,
KEXEC_CHECK,
INITRAMFS_CHECK,
+   POLICY_CHECK,
MAX_CHECK
 };
 
@@ -191,6 +192,7 @@ int ima_policy_show(struct seq_file *m, void *v);
 #define IMA_APPRAISE_LOG   0x04
 #define IMA_APPRAISE_MODULES   0x08
 #define IMA_APPRAISE_FIRMWARE  0x10
+#define IMA_APPRAISE_POLICY0x20
 
 #ifdef CONFIG_IMA_APPRAISE
 int ima_appraise_measurement(enum ima_hooks func,
diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_fs.c b/security/integrity/ima/ima_fs.c
index 00ccd67..7b15e80 100644
--- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_fs.c
+++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_fs.c
@@ -325,7 +325,14 @@ static ssize_t ima_write_policy(struct file *file, const 
char __user *buf,
 
if (data[0] == '/')
result = ima_read_policy(data);
-   else
+   else if (ima_appraise & IMA_APPRAISE_POLICY) {
+   pr_err("IMA: signed policy required\n");
+   integrity_audit_msg(AUDIT_INTEGRITY_STATUS, NULL, NULL,
+   "policy_update", "signed policy required",
+   1, 0);
+   if (ima_appraise & IMA_APPRAISE_ENFORCE)
+   result = -EACCES;
+   } else
result = ima_parse_add_rule(data);
mutex_unlock(_write_mutex);
 out_free:
diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c 
b/security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c
index ccf9526..497a6f2 100644
--- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c
+++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c
@@ -386,6 +386,9 @@ int ima_post_read_file(struct file *file, void *buf, loff_t 
size,
case READING_KEXEC_INITRAMFS:
func = INITRAMFS_CHECK;
break;
+   case READING_POLICY:
+   func = POLICY_CHECK;
+   break;
default:
func = FILE_CHECK;
break;
diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c 
b/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c
index d02560e..39a811a 100644
--- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c
+++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c
@@ -114,6 +114,7 @@ static struct ima_rule_entry default_measurement_rules[] = {
 .uid = GLOBAL_ROOT_UID, .flags = IMA_FUNC | IMA_INMASK | IMA_UID},
{.action = MEASURE, .func = MODULE_CHECK, .flags = IMA_FUNC},
{.action = MEASURE, .func = FIRMWARE_CHECK, .flags = IMA_FUNC},
+   {.action = MEASURE, .func = POLICY_CHECK, .flags = IMA_FUNC},
 };
 
 static struct ima_rule_entry default_appraise_rules[] = {
@@ -616,6 +617,8 @@ static int ima_parse_rule(char *rule, struct ima_rule_entry 
*entry)
entry->func = KEXEC_CHECK;
else if (strcmp(args[0].from, "INITRAMFS_CHECK") == 0)
entry->func = INITRAMFS_CHECK;
+   else if (strcmp(args[0].from, "POLICY_CHECK") == 0)
+   entry->func = POLICY_CHECK;
else
result = -EINVAL;
if (!result)
@@ -774,6 +777,8 @@ static int ima_parse_rule(char *rule, struct ima_rule_entry 
*entry)
temp_ima_appraise |= IMA_APPRAISE_MODULES;
else if (entry->func == FIRMWARE_CHECK)
temp_ima_appraise |= IMA_APPRAISE_FIRMWARE;
+   else if (entry->func == POLICY_CHECK)
+   temp_ima_appraise |= IMA_APPRAISE_POLICY;
audit_log_format(ab, "res=%d", !result);
audit_log_end(ab);
return result;
@@ -860,7 +865,7 @@ static char *mask_tokens[] = {
 enum {
func_file = 0, func_mmap, func_bprm,
func_module, func_firmware, func_post,
-   func_kexec, func_initramfs
+   func_kexec, func_initramfs, func_policy
 };
 
 static char *func_tokens[] = {
@@ -940,6 +945,9 @@ static void policy_func_show(struct seq_file *m, enum 
ima_hooks func)
case INITRAMFS_CHECK:
seq_printf(m, pt(Opt_func), ft(func_initramfs));
break;
+   case POLICY_CHECK:
+   seq_printf(m, pt(Opt_func), ft(func_policy));
+   break;
default:
snprintf(tbuf, sizeof(tbuf), "%d", func);
seq_printf(m, pt(Opt_func), tbuf);
-- 
2.1.0


___
kexec mailing list
kexec@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec