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;
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 5/8] ima: make process_buffer_measurement() generic
From:   Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com>
To:     Nayna Jain <nayna@linux.ibm.com>, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org,
        linux-efi@vger.kernel.org, linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
        Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
        Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
        Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>,
        Jeremy Kerr <jk@ozlabs.org>,
        Matthew Garret <matthew.garret@nebula.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        Claudio Carvalho <cclaudio@linux.ibm.com>,
        George Wilson <gcwilson@linux.ibm.com>,
        Elaine Palmer <erpalmer@us.ibm.com>,
        Eric Ricther <erichte@linux.ibm.com>,
        "Oliver O'Halloran" <oohall@gmail.com>,
        Prakhar Srivastava <prsriva02@gmail.com>,
        Lakshmi Ramasubramanian <nramas@linux.microsoft.com>
Date:   Sat, 19 Oct 2019 21:21:46 -0400
In-Reply-To: <1571508377-23603-6-git-send-email-nayna@linux.ibm.com>
References: <1571508377-23603-1-git-send-email-nayna@linux.ibm.com>
         <1571508377-23603-6-git-send-email-nayna@linux.ibm.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-Id: <1571534506.5250.339.camel@linux.ibm.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Sat, 2019-10-19 at 14:06 -0400, Nayna Jain wrote:
> process_buffer_measurement() is limited to measuring the kexec boot
> command line. This patch makes process_buffer_measurement() more
> generic, allowing it to measure other types of buffer data (e.g.
> blacklisted binary hashes or key hashes).

based on "func".
> 
> This patch modifies the function to conditionally retrieve the policy
> defined pcr and template based on the func.

This would be done in a subsequent patch, not here.

> @@ -642,19 +642,38 @@ static void process_buffer_measurement(const void *buf, int size,
>  					    .filename = eventname,
>  					    .buf = buf,
>  					    .buf_len = size};
> -	struct ima_template_desc *template_desc = NULL;
> +	struct ima_template_desc *template = NULL;
>  	struct {
>  		struct ima_digest_data hdr;
>  		char digest[IMA_MAX_DIGEST_SIZE];
>  	} hash = {};
>  	int violation = 0;
> -	int pcr = CONFIG_IMA_MEASURE_PCR_IDX;
>  	int action = 0;
> +	u32 secid;
>  
> -	action = ima_get_action(NULL, cred, secid, 0, KEXEC_CMDLINE, &pcr,
> -				&template_desc);
> -	if (!(action & IMA_MEASURE))
> -		return;
> +	if (func) {
> +		security_task_getsecid(current, &secid);
> +		action = ima_get_action(NULL, current_cred(), secid, 0, func,
> +					&pcr, &template);
> +		if (!(action & IMA_MEASURE))
> +			return;
> +	}
> +

Initially there is no need to test "func".  A specific "func" test
would be added as needed. 

Mimi