Received: by 2002:a25:d7c1:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id o184csp1907464ybg; Thu, 24 Oct 2019 01:52:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwhuozZ/cIuirNZugVjqxwM+3F7T1M2wIqTH4ZHzYBVjoirg6TeuQnlsH32FUy7dvQU9mjV X-Received: by 2002:aa7:ca59:: with SMTP id j25mr42085289edt.78.1571907170513; Thu, 24 Oct 2019 01:52:50 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1571907170; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=dTIPyXZ1IwiE39ezQX5zfq7231aGi9T8xqa99H/O3mxFw7PWV0JfgjO5YctHvkamUA Vwgk2qrOiGp4bFBplXeQDr4OrVc/4YSHPvIcqCOl35BNALnAk/t7ZzNV6pwgvzqJ+7JW HoKCnd4U0lFi8C/GVBn4JnzIRIdrfE3G6cETS5Kgv3ijWW7hxmemnCDs1y9X7u+vVUtp diMS1pFeeqPiD9o96Yi+239F6v69WkVJ+DQSS5EfFTux7leFxLsVxCDsDEysa4JcjD6F FhYXucIpJdcqbPDYSx+IY/0tWWSckmfRxccAjfAcgIBYofe6t2QvXHfZdwIAZRQIzXqe viZA== 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:to:from:subject; bh=GjE2LNXfEhjIDbytw4E9GQJpZcPwrZoMJjNSQ15eHzA=; b=MmlaSALFT0bxwTUorArcjkD+TFyDYoZQTSMVV3sKhN9k9sx/6/c81eyt2H/GPnjin9 tBQJqL82M90bFqown06y/gWgm3qSOxlYpLq6+60bo9RBc1S/0eQbuxp1eHZoO7i8abTN 8OhPlSB7dubM7zrObbauejj0GlWpAgKxPLhRPN/raxMoiJOnrLr59e71QuTioc77NWlB wEWKwmkahKmUnM+APmX1+GjLvxsOQGDPZH2xjzmYUrdlsAX5a549xA6COKDEMwosb3IN VGJyyZmZs+h+7OGFo4PAiQQAM5tegj8OcauflMKgDZuWsGf/TilwNjiy0zZXVUtE3ONp aNmw== 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 e23si15663548edq.344.2019.10.24.01.52.26; Thu, 24 Oct 2019 01:52:50 -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 S1732217AbfJWRw3 (ORCPT + 99 others); Wed, 23 Oct 2019 13:52:29 -0400 Received: from mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.158.5]:20620 "EHLO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1730584AbfJWRw3 (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Oct 2019 13:52:29 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098417.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id x9NHX1rx048517 for ; Wed, 23 Oct 2019 13:52:27 -0400 Received: from e06smtp01.uk.ibm.com (e06smtp01.uk.ibm.com [195.75.94.97]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2vtt20bm7b-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Wed, 23 Oct 2019 13:52:27 -0400 Received: from localhost by e06smtp01.uk.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Wed, 23 Oct 2019 18:52:25 +0100 Received: from b06cxnps3075.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (9.149.109.195) by e06smtp01.uk.ibm.com (192.168.101.131) with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted; (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256/256) Wed, 23 Oct 2019 18:52:22 +0100 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 x9NHqLjt58523784 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 23 Oct 2019 17:52:21 GMT Received: from d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 916004C052; Wed, 23 Oct 2019 17:52:21 +0000 (GMT) Received: from d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 187A44C044; Wed, 23 Oct 2019 17:52:20 +0000 (GMT) Received: from localhost.localdomain (unknown [9.85.184.174]) by d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Wed, 23 Oct 2019 17:52:19 +0000 (GMT) Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 5/6] KEYS: measure queued keys From: Mimi Zohar To: Lakshmi Ramasubramanian , dhowells@redhat.com, casey@schaufler-ca.com, sashal@kernel.org, jamorris@linux.microsoft.com, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, keyrings@vger.kernel.org Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2019 13:52:19 -0400 In-Reply-To: <89d778d1-1ac9-4a58-b159-7db68b7fa4ad@linux.microsoft.com> References: <20191023001818.3684-1-nramas@linux.microsoft.com> <20191023001818.3684-6-nramas@linux.microsoft.com> <1571836990.5104.96.camel@linux.ibm.com> <89d778d1-1ac9-4a58-b159-7db68b7fa4ad@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: 19102317-4275-0000-0000-000003764C0B X-IBM-AV-DETECTION: SAVI=unused REMOTE=unused XFE=unused x-cbparentid: 19102317-4276-0000-0000-00003889740D Message-Id: <1571853139.5104.154.camel@linux.ibm.com> X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:,, definitions=2019-10-23_04:,, 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=8.0.1-1908290000 definitions=main-1910230168 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 2019-10-23 at 10:34 -0700, Lakshmi Ramasubramanian wrote: > On 10/23/19 6:23 AM, Mimi Zohar wrote: > > > The ordering of this patch set is awkward.  It should first introduce > > a generic method for measuring keys based on the keyring.  Then add > > the additional support needed for the specific builtin_trusted_keys > > keyring usecase. > > Would the following ordering of the patch set be acceptable: > > => PATCH 0/5: Cover letter > > => PATCH 1/5: Define the enum "hook(BUILTIN_TRUSTED_KEYS)" in ima.h > > => PATCH 2/5: Define ima hook > This will initially do nothing if ima is not yet > initialized. > Call process_buffer_measurement() if ima is initialized. > > => PATCH 3/5: key_create_or_update change and the call to ima hook > > => PATCH 4/5: Queue\De-Queue of key measurement requests. > Enable queuing of key in the ima hook if ima is not > initialized. > > => PATCH 5/5: ima policy to enable measurement of keys which will > enable end-to-end working of this feature. The first patches need to introduce the generic concept of measuring keys based on policy.  Only afterwards would you add any builtin trusted keyring specific code. Mimi