Received: by 2002:a25:d7c1:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id o184csp1940145ybg; Sun, 27 Oct 2019 07:51:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxxdb7j4uWBAZeVI0lCWxj/QqnDQR4J6vh1/9IP8vBmNJePWUXJw53uMJHy4yKQKKcr5vge X-Received: by 2002:a50:f058:: with SMTP id u24mr14941239edl.288.1572187870824; Sun, 27 Oct 2019 07:51:10 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1572187870; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=J3Nj/46UpfZCDDI5jwMdmJnSJDMN6Kh6+NxflYza44T7b/ElT1B1/T2YH9eXb8C1p5 /UybcVW8Td5js9FetHmnfzWyouItrZrYO5F5HUkZPe08ocAgHU0ZualoeHaXezzUE84E gZR/4Pfq5KkHjnyv86zLjzNA6rQIQGE2/oaHnwtEzAZWxvfN3exd2TPZo73tJFrL2jNC AP68/yE65GXTElQCH7jZ3V1fwuHkSIxepgJEaqIsMG9ygJtneEYj/BwAMTuzaWHh+KsH Y5a2II2KWwb7pM+nnkxWru7Rw7LwLxMCBCff5g5CLXwuJwS1WzGc3b5Ngo+twx/f8dFq l/GA== 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=WTa1E7/2pWpQ+Ihh9vy2bffTqW5+DOSisM0inTx0ALw=; b=Xg0aRsvmy4tpFvsph/8dzyo+IrkQltnmDeFJZykwL1vsQE96hE/K9i2Joep3K8kSHC 2+ejpd6K2rVSjumZ4hK/xCpfU1YzNWDf1ITSZl4VhB4UvBczWmvuKNaHvTHC/nGG2iwm vrUf2taXl2Ja63T3exrJZgMYszBywJIBcUe73UjZtcCQsBRvjF8hHyg/rWzcSegGWTLm wB7xRKam45HnJWxclGQlzQ9VAMVCWZfv9bmEQ4emb6Mze/Fd69dhij0NVIziXDFnvbeK alke/7lCNuY1N8Cxs8OCKkOfCR1Kfn4j5lYGrDmZDRzmrjtwAyQQdnACIDAloDy5+WHt AflA== 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 26si5549804edz.340.2019.10.27.07.50.47; Sun, 27 Oct 2019 07:51:10 -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 S1727274AbfJ0Ord (ORCPT + 99 others); Sun, 27 Oct 2019 10:47:33 -0400 Received: from mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.158.5]:12940 "EHLO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726796AbfJ0Ord (ORCPT ); Sun, 27 Oct 2019 10:47:33 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098414.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id x9REkeUF138989 for ; Sun, 27 Oct 2019 10:47:31 -0400 Received: from e06smtp02.uk.ibm.com (e06smtp02.uk.ibm.com [195.75.94.98]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2vw3rqwp6s-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Sun, 27 Oct 2019 10:47:31 -0400 Received: from localhost by e06smtp02.uk.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Sun, 27 Oct 2019 14:47:29 -0000 Received: from b06cxnps4074.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (9.149.109.196) by e06smtp02.uk.ibm.com (192.168.101.132) with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted; (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256/256) Sun, 27 Oct 2019 14:47:26 -0000 Received: from d06av23.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06av23.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.105.59]) by b06cxnps4074.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id x9RElQtk38797364 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Sun, 27 Oct 2019 14:47:26 GMT Received: from d06av23.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id E7EF9A4053; Sun, 27 Oct 2019 14:47:25 +0000 (GMT) Received: from d06av23.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id C07AEA4040; Sun, 27 Oct 2019 14:47:24 +0000 (GMT) Received: from localhost.localdomain (unknown [9.85.187.251]) by d06av23.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Sun, 27 Oct 2019 14:47:24 +0000 (GMT) Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] KEYS: Defined an ima hook for measuring keys on key create or update 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: Sun, 27 Oct 2019 10:47:24 -0400 In-Reply-To: References: <20191023233950.22072-1-nramas@linux.microsoft.com> <20191023233950.22072-2-nramas@linux.microsoft.com> <1572032428.4532.72.camel@linux.ibm.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: 19102714-0008-0000-0000-0000032813FF X-IBM-AV-DETECTION: SAVI=unused REMOTE=unused XFE=unused x-cbparentid: 19102714-0009-0000-0000-00004A474F0A Message-Id: <1572187644.4532.211.camel@linux.ibm.com> X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:,, definitions=2019-10-27_06:,, 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-1910270155 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 2019-10-25 at 15:28 -0700, Lakshmi Ramasubramanian wrote: > On 10/25/2019 12:40 PM, Mimi Zohar wrote: > > >> +void ima_post_key_create_or_update(struct key *keyring, struct key *key, > >> + unsigned long flags, bool create) > >> +{ > >> + const struct public_key *pk; > >> + > >> + if (key->type != &key_type_asymmetric) > >> + return; > >> + > >> + if (!ima_initialized) > >> + return; > > > > There's no reason to define a new variable to determine if IMA is > > initialized.  Use ima_policy_flag. > > Please correct me if I am wrong - > > ima_policy_flag will be set to 0 if IMA is not yet initialized > OR > IMA is initialized, but ima_policy_flag could be still set to 0 (say, > due to the configured policy). > > In the latter case the measurement request should be a NOP immediately. I'm not sure.  The builtin keys most likely will be loaded prior to a custom IMA policy containing "keyring" rules are defined. Mimi