Received: by 10.223.176.46 with SMTP id f43csp2033294wra; Thu, 25 Jan 2018 03:57:36 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AH8x226LtBGb/9KQgCfIjRNz0Qc9YuMnhsBbLcnNMjJGFiavCcZ/tH3kShd7olYVy98rbvHxSd7o X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:b68b:: with SMTP id c11-v6mr10975988pls.95.1516881456644; Thu, 25 Jan 2018 03:57:36 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1516881456; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=GX+jZhaDvDipShu8JYFXXkeU36i1h4Fr++E6sskBisIjKzEeHZD9j7p+rBuTR3T2dB 9OPVsDpzgCSjgeeNu901csjfLSHZ4oBE7mfy0Ofy47pSUZiWHm9o0iu3bM+c1sImjlZU NKBrndUN+SrYMu2WUnqdLVr+MV5GTUiwcoi94559wMNRoPY6oDaA1WN16MeQOZfNfCnu MvHSKXSDJ4BMGg00TbKn7M4GFasQOE8GlaupozRH1IOfv48F82oHgrh4r4HsrsBgzu72 W1aD5oEFyLl8LyGcX741OwB5vd2lhHFxgXrogCdX25iOqQnhN6SSD0/FLdNDr5AxUd7F Zb6A== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:message-id:content-transfer-encoding :mime-version:references:in-reply-to:date:cc:to:from:subject :arc-authentication-results; bh=F3uRtG0qjQaWBuGjvWeHtzlcjw1j26FO4Nig3yFvGDU=; b=yb4md4ukJ9w55Rsz0CqKz7RJ+r8K98g2aEFMxeK7VB0WYqr2nt2OZ2Szaa+aUgksu9 yR7sy/2+jpkcZnjQV4obWzzZtn93wziZuWhKByeH605BgYBHaNtwwYdyOcOK6hWqoqxj UMq4EaiQFnOQ9SIMEdR0u9INM/CLwz756wyKcKlEmGtt7Jvu9mpaOlJj4do7nmqzHATV g288PLodSbAL2xL1tbBDDmCsDk4yGSfMG2/0AIggbACGhP48VJ7fG3ai5vFzS2NzWkX9 n60utavXhpkx+hcoqTpTTWQ0/MJAvN26x++y0iut/KTdYwpu8NMuOOoIVrkb6SVgqMVR F6zQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=ibm.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id a61-v6si1871894plc.593.2018.01.25.03.57.22; Thu, 25 Jan 2018 03:57:36 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=ibm.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751849AbeAYL44 (ORCPT + 99 others); Thu, 25 Jan 2018 06:56:56 -0500 Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.156.1]:56178 "EHLO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751802AbeAYL4w (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Jan 2018 06:56:52 -0500 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098399.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.22/8.16.0.22) with SMTP id w0PBuG5a113310 for ; Thu, 25 Jan 2018 06:56:51 -0500 Received: from e06smtp10.uk.ibm.com (e06smtp10.uk.ibm.com [195.75.94.106]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2fqdnu2vd4-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Thu, 25 Jan 2018 06:56:51 -0500 Received: from localhost by e06smtp10.uk.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Thu, 25 Jan 2018 11:56:48 -0000 Received: from b06cxnps3075.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (9.149.109.195) by e06smtp10.uk.ibm.com (192.168.101.140) with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted; Thu, 25 Jan 2018 11:56:44 -0000 Received: from d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.105.58]) by b06cxnps3075.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id w0PBuiKG64815160; Thu, 25 Jan 2018 11:56:44 GMT Received: from d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2FA164C044; Thu, 25 Jan 2018 11:50:47 +0000 (GMT) Received: from d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2DBD34C040; Thu, 25 Jan 2018 11:50:45 +0000 (GMT) Received: from localhost.localdomain (unknown [9.80.93.176]) by d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Thu, 25 Jan 2018 11:50:45 +0000 (GMT) Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 2/2] ima: force re-appraisal on filesystems with FS_IMA_NO_CACHE From: Mimi Zohar To: "Serge E. Hallyn" , Alban Crequy Cc: alban@kinvolk.io, dongsu@kinvolk.io, iago@kinvolk.io, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, miklos@szeredi.hu, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, dmitry.kasatkin@gmail.com, james.l.morris@oracle.com, seth.forshee@canonical.com, hch@infradead.org Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2018 06:56:41 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20180124175234.GA29811@mail.hallyn.com> References: <20180122162452.8756-1-alban@kinvolk.io> <20180122162452.8756-3-alban@kinvolk.io> <20180124175234.GA29811@mail.hallyn.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.20.5 (3.20.5-1.fc24) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 x-cbid: 18012511-0040-0000-0000-00000408ACD4 X-IBM-AV-DETECTION: SAVI=unused REMOTE=unused XFE=unused x-cbparentid: 18012511-0041-0000-0000-0000260C35E1 Message-Id: <1516881401.3751.37.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com> X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:,, definitions=2018-01-25_03:,, signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1011 lowpriorityscore=0 impostorscore=0 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1709140000 definitions=main-1801250163 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > > @@ -228,9 +229,28 @@ static int process_measurement(struct file *file, char *buf, loff_t size, > > IMA_APPRAISE_SUBMASK | IMA_APPRAISED_SUBMASK | > > IMA_ACTION_FLAGS); > > > > - if (test_and_clear_bit(IMA_CHANGE_XATTR, &iint->atomic_flags)) > > - /* reset all flags if ima_inode_setxattr was called */ > > + /* > > + * Reset the measure, appraise and audit cached flags either if: > > + * - ima_inode_setxattr was called, or > > + * - based on filesystem feature flag > > + * forcing the file to be re-evaluated. > > + */ > > + if (test_and_clear_bit(IMA_CHANGE_XATTR, &iint->atomic_flags)) { > > iint->flags &= ~IMA_DONE_MASK; > > + } else if (inode->i_sb->s_type->fs_flags & FS_IMA_NO_CACHE) { > > + if (action & IMA_MEASURE) { > > + iint->measured_pcrs = 0; > > + iint->flags &= > > + ~(IMA_COLLECTED | IMA_MEASURE | IMA_MEASURED); > > + } > > + if (action & IMA_APPRAISE) > > + iint->flags &= > > + ~(IMA_COLLECTED | IMA_APPRAISE | IMA_APPRAISED | > > + IMA_APPRAISE_SUBMASK | IMA_APPRAISED_SUBMASK); > > + if (action & IMA_AUDIT) > > + iint->flags &= > > + ~(IMA_COLLECTED | IMA_AUDIT | IMA_AUDITED); > > + } > > Alban, I don't know what I was thinking, but this can be simplified like for the IMA_CHANGE_XATTR case.  Except in the IMA_CHANGE_XATTR case, "measured_pcrs" was already reset, whereas in this case "measured_pcrs" needs to be reset. Mimi