Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Wed, 8 Jul 2020 13:30:04 +0000
From:   Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@kernel.org>
To:     Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
Cc:     Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
        James Morris <jmorris@namei.org>,
        Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com>,
        Scott Branden <scott.branden@broadcom.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
        Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
        Jessica Yu <jeyu@kernel.org>,
        Dmitry Kasatkin <dmitry.kasatkin@gmail.com>,
        "Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@hallyn.com>,
        Casey Schaufler <casey@schaufler-ca.com>,
        "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Matthew Garrett <matthewgarrett@google.com>,
        David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
        Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+huawei@kernel.org>,
        Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>,
        "Joel Fernandes (Google)" <joel@joelfernandes.org>,
        KP Singh <kpsingh@google.com>, Dave Olsthoorn <dave@bewaar.me>,
        Peter Jones <pjones@redhat.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Stephen Boyd <stephen.boyd@linaro.org>,
        Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] Fix misused kernel_read_file() enums
Message-ID: <20200708133004.GG4332@42.do-not-panic.com>
References: <20200707081926.3688096-1-keescook@chromium.org>
 <3c01073b-c422-dd97-0677-c16fe1158907@redhat.com>
 <f5e65f73-2c94-3614-2479-69b2bfda9775@redhat.com>
 <20200708115517.GF4332@42.do-not-panic.com>
 <8766279d-0ebe-1f64-c590-4a71a733609b@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <8766279d-0ebe-1f64-c590-4a71a733609b@redhat.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Jul 08, 2020 at 01:58:47PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On 7/8/20 1:55 PM, Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 08, 2020 at 01:37:41PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > > 
> > > On 7/8/20 1:01 PM, Hans de Goede wrote:
> > > > Hi,
> > > > 
> > > > On 7/7/20 10:19 AM, Kees Cook wrote:
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > > 
> > > > > In looking for closely at the additions that got made to the
> > > > > kernel_read_file() enums, I noticed that FIRMWARE_PREALLOC_BUFFER
> > > > > and FIRMWARE_EFI_EMBEDDED were added, but they are not appropriate
> > > > > *kinds* of files for the LSM to reason about. They are a "how" and
> > > > > "where", respectively. Remove these improper aliases and refactor the
> > > > > code to adapt to the changes.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Additionally adds in missing calls to security_kernel_post_read_file()
> > > > > in the platform firmware fallback path (to match the sysfs firmware
> > > > > fallback path) and in module loading. I considered entirely removing
> > > > > security_kernel_post_read_file() hook since it is technically unused,
> > > > > but IMA probably wants to be able to measure EFI-stored firmware images,
> > > > > so I wired it up and matched it for modules, in case anyone wants to
> > > > > move the module signature checks out of the module core and into an LSM
> > > > > to avoid the current layering violations.
> > > > > 
> > > > > This touches several trees, and I suspect it would be best to go through
> > > > > James's LSM tree.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Thanks!
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > I've done some quick tests on this series to make sure that
> > > > the efi embedded-firmware support did not regress.
> > > > That still works fine, so this series is;
> > > > 
> > > > Tested-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
> > > 
> > > I made a mistake during testing I was not actually running the
> > > kernel with the patches added.
> > > 
> > > After fixing that I did find a problem, patch 4/4:
> > > "module: Add hook for security_kernel_post_read_file()"
> > > 
> > > Breaks module-loading for me. This is with the 4 patches
> > > on top of 5.8.0-rc4, so this might just be because I'm
> > > not using the right base.
> > > 
> > > With patch 4/4 reverted things work fine for me.
> > > 
> > > So, please only add my Tested-by to patches 1-3.
> > 
> > BTW is there any testing covered by the selftests for the firmware
> > laoder which would have caputured this? If not can you extend
> > it with something to capture this case you ran into?
> 
> This was not a firmware-loading issue. For me in my tests,
> which were limited to 1 device, patch 4/4, which only touches
> the module-loading code, stopped module loading from working.
> 
> Since my test device has / on an eMMC and the kernel config
> I'm using has mmc-block as a module, things just hung in the
> initrd since no modules could be loaded, so I did not debug
> this any further. Dropping  patch 4/4 from my local tree
> solved this.

Thanks Hans!

Kees, would test_kmod.c and the respective selftest would have picked
this issue up?

  Luis