Received: by 2002:a25:4158:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id o85csp1177043yba; Thu, 16 May 2019 16:01:31 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqz6bfAabkllCymI77gdeus6IeVrgvRGbKNonmwM7nzQ+S2WS/G6LvHYmwumKE7bJB8E46wk X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:a407:: with SMTP id p7mr18652871plq.41.1558047691156; Thu, 16 May 2019 16:01:31 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1558047691; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=rJ4ZFiN9VfxJFsJk8OFbF8x0hmSYBvSozGcmcSUj58t8qYncqquWCPMSq0qmY8WKkL N9EWYyN3Hy9AT7fntSk0WXQANNSj+4EZDSTjTYGeSKEKnviDuvBvWgBFzd3IW8tSGXGR wAppitj6hioAont5yHI9MYXWSBI+G2MEhjOYawPwRv9GgkdZJTOAJ7HYTnOxOSjhMtoj x1S67YHg9GN5ASBJneJB9fo/Fb5IHqwy4QmuA7gKqt6cYK/9Q9JuyF4sfBLEHa9RCuCy CHDliFhr5U/XGHGigSb0TdyrvcKHvuCFlfpRBi8U0Kf12c8MnjvbO6KVEGj0jQW+l5jF qGAA== 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; bh=rliR7hT/HjafYKylnbPKRgDJn4fhgwZmpBo9abTNRZ8=; b=TePmFDnWtfRnctT3iXqlMgM442LHxDiLnMdvK1xL4T3LqJjzkmdbm9CYkdychusRbQ GgesLVGGa/eO72Dr4Yl+PXNZJtwa+vhJh3lhNv2ExIix8EstMyqe/4ii/LuA2wae1f9N BkaO2sOFd6C2w1LM0/9iBQcM7eooXOB2RYszRnSQi7MOcI3AMcdeoartrRVk5VH9feO3 tS4VNmhskHHcvrWcPUhqHq3xxST2KJ+lyulpn/0v3qQINaB5l9R5hX7ph6+tNj2il4cm U/FmA0tPHrMK6v0gai6pQaG3hkxLiVO88pHxAIjczl+3mCzXdXg2ALIxJ9oNakMhR+Uj Bbjw== 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 s26si5976473pgv.201.2019.05.16.16.01.15; Thu, 16 May 2019 16:01:31 -0700 (PDT) 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 S1728697AbfEPWpx (ORCPT + 99 others); Thu, 16 May 2019 18:45:53 -0400 Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.156.1]:33388 "EHLO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726920AbfEPWpx (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 May 2019 18:45:53 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098409.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id x4GMdFJe054368 for ; Thu, 16 May 2019 18:45:52 -0400 Received: from e06smtp04.uk.ibm.com (e06smtp04.uk.ibm.com [195.75.94.100]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2shecwwbg5-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Thu, 16 May 2019 18:45:52 -0400 Received: from localhost by e06smtp04.uk.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Thu, 16 May 2019 23:45:49 +0100 Received: from b06cxnps4075.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (9.149.109.197) by e06smtp04.uk.ibm.com (192.168.101.134) with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted; (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256/256) Thu, 16 May 2019 23:45:46 +0100 Received: from d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.105.58]) by b06cxnps4075.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id x4GMjj6D54460446 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 16 May 2019 22:45:45 GMT Received: from d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id B87FF4CBD6; Thu, 16 May 2019 22:45:45 +0000 (GMT) Received: from d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id C43BC4CBD3; Thu, 16 May 2019 22:45:44 +0000 (GMT) Received: from localhost.localdomain (unknown [9.80.80.98]) by d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Thu, 16 May 2019 22:45:44 +0000 (GMT) Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] public key: IMA signer logging: Log public key of IMA Signature signer in IMA log From: Mimi Zohar To: Lakshmi , Linux Integrity , David Howells , James Morris , Linux Kernel Cc: Balaji Balasubramanyan , Prakhar Srivastava Date: Thu, 16 May 2019 18:45:34 -0400 In-Reply-To: <715a9b39-0cde-1ce0-2d01-68d4fc0f5333@linux.microsoft.com> References: <6b69f115-96cf-890a-c92b-0b2b05798357@linux.microsoft.com> <1557854992.4139.69.camel@linux.ibm.com> <715a9b39-0cde-1ce0-2d01-68d4fc0f5333@linux.microsoft.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: 19051622-0016-0000-0000-0000027C8816 X-IBM-AV-DETECTION: SAVI=unused REMOTE=unused XFE=unused x-cbparentid: 19051622-0017-0000-0000-000032D9616B Message-Id: <1558046734.4507.28.camel@linux.ibm.com> X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:,, definitions=2019-05-16_18:,, 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=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1810050000 definitions=main-1905160137 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 2019-05-15 at 11:17 -0700, Lakshmi wrote: > Hi Mimi, > > I would like to make sure I understood your feedback. > > > > > Why duplicate the certificate info on each record in the measurement > > list?  Why not add the certificate info once, as the key is loaded > > onto the .ima and .platform keyrings? > > > > key_create_or_update function in security/keys/key.c is called to > add\update a key to a keyring. Are you suggesting that an IMA function > be called from here to add the certificate info to the IMA log? There's an existing LSM hook in alloc_key(), but the keyring isn't being passed.  Again a decision would need to be made as to whether this needs to be an LSM or IMA hook. > > Our requirement is that the key information is available in the IMA log > which is TPM backed. > There's some confusion as to why adding the keys to the measurement list is needed.  Could you respond to Ken's questions please? Mimi