Message-ID: <711ce320-25c7-5ace-a026-89a55dc7c068@linux.ibm.com>
Date:   Wed, 8 Dec 2021 10:39:48 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/91.2.0
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 16/16] ima: Setup securityfs for IMA namespace
Content-Language: en-US
To:     Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@ubuntu.com>
Cc:     linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org, zohar@linux.ibm.com,
        serge@hallyn.com, containers@lists.linux.dev,
        dmitry.kasatkin@gmail.com, ebiederm@xmission.com,
        krzysztof.struczynski@huawei.com, roberto.sassu@huawei.com,
        mpeters@redhat.com, lhinds@redhat.com, lsturman@redhat.com,
        puiterwi@redhat.com, jejb@linux.ibm.com, jamjoom@us.ibm.com,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, paul@paul-moore.com, rgb@redhat.com,
        linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, jmorris@namei.org,
        James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>
References: <20211207202127.1508689-1-stefanb@linux.ibm.com>
 <20211207202127.1508689-17-stefanb@linux.ibm.com>
 <20211208125814.hdaghdq7yk5wvvor@wittgenstein>
From:   Stefan Berger <stefanb@linux.ibm.com>
In-Reply-To: <20211208125814.hdaghdq7yk5wvvor@wittgenstein>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk


On 12/8/21 07:58, Christian Brauner wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 07, 2021 at 03:21:27PM -0500, Stefan Berger wrote:
>>   
>>   #if defined(CONFIG_IMA_APPRAISE) && defined(CONFIG_INTEGRITY_TRUSTED_KEYRING)
>> diff --git a/security/inode.c b/security/inode.c
>> index 121ac1874dde..10ee20917f42 100644
>> --- a/security/inode.c
>> +++ b/security/inode.c
>> @@ -16,6 +16,7 @@
>>   #include <linux/fs_context.h>
>>   #include <linux/mount.h>
>>   #include <linux/pagemap.h>
>> +#include <linux/ima.h>
>>   #include <linux/init.h>
>>   #include <linux/namei.h>
>>   #include <linux/security.h>
>> @@ -41,6 +42,7 @@ static const struct super_operations securityfs_super_operations = {
>>   static int securityfs_fill_super(struct super_block *sb, struct fs_context *fc)
>>   {
>>   	static const struct tree_descr files[] = {{""}};
>> +	struct user_namespace *ns = fc->user_ns;
>>   	int error;
>>   
>>   	error = simple_fill_super(sb, SECURITYFS_MAGIC, files);
>> @@ -49,7 +51,10 @@ static int securityfs_fill_super(struct super_block *sb, struct fs_context *fc)
>>   
>>   	sb->s_op = &securityfs_super_operations;
>>   
>> -	return 0;
>> +	if (ns != &init_user_ns)
>> +		error = ima_fs_ns_init(ns, sb->s_root);
>> +
>> +	return error;
>>   }
>>   
>>   static int securityfs_get_tree(struct fs_context *fc)
>> @@ -69,6 +74,11 @@ static int securityfs_init_fs_context(struct fs_context *fc)
>>   
>>   static void securityfs_kill_super(struct super_block *sb)
>>   {
>> +	struct user_namespace *ns = sb->s_fs_info;
>> +
>> +	if (ns != &init_user_ns)
>> +		ima_fs_ns_free_dentries(ns);
> Say securityfs is unmounted. Then all the inodes and dentries become
> invalid. It's not allowed to hold on to any dentries or inodes after the
> super_block is shut down. So I just want to be sure that nothing in ima
> can access these dentries after securityfs is unmounted.

> To put it another way: why are they stored in struct ima_namespace in
> the first place? If you don't pin a filesystem when creating files or
> directories like you do for securityfs in init_ima_ns then you don't
> need to hold on to them as they will be automatically be wiped during
> umount.


The reason was so that securityfs for init_ima_ns and IMA namespaces 
could share the code assigning to dentries to keep around and can clean 
up if an error occurs while creating a dentry.

What about this: We keep the dentries in the ima_namespace, modify the 
code creating the dentries in securityfs_create_dentry() to only take 
the additional reference in case of init_user_ns (I suppose this is what 
you suggest) and then keep 'static void ima_fs_ns_free_dentries()' only 
for removing the dentries for the error case and never call it from 
securityfs_kill_super()? Would that be acceptable?