Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 09447C433FE for ; Wed, 5 Jan 2022 23:37:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S245444AbiAEXhp (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Jan 2022 18:37:45 -0500 Received: from ams.source.kernel.org ([145.40.68.75]:41046 "EHLO ams.source.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S245409AbiAEXhn (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Jan 2022 18:37:43 -0500 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (relay.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ams.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9346AB81E4F; Wed, 5 Jan 2022 23:37:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 29601C36AEB; Wed, 5 Jan 2022 23:37:41 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1641425861; bh=OaLKFIb1ARkLk57/Qx+mC0toRsPO01IbTArB7l0GSGk=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=fZ8YfQ49EC0EhJAppEFkb0vUFMS87Daa9OygTU2vi2TwRmWp4D0XjetDuyQ+d8W+6 fKijCFS0fqjNli3Mt1ATHxCAnWCZc2y0USD4xWgeREAbFNv4iugCOgC2oRIEjk93X4 vOewN73t8qiPTZm1I4kOTXjQGcm4LncJ6r09861TIcjfIXjGnXU3nZ19/9mpPpZl+m uWGV2aCA2Vezm/TxHvztqZ5gQkb/jeTtpTRPmSjpfqUauppTBBJKfLYzFrnSad/Fuu 6apHsJXoSkRrs3YMf7/UP1ccuiW4i/CPddsOxNZli1r8HFMl3+d6S5fQdTIaRDBEwf 34haKz9YnhOew== Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2022 15:37:39 -0800 From: Eric Biggers To: Mimi Zohar Cc: linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org, linux-fscrypt@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 4/5] ima: support fs-verity file digest based signatures Message-ID: References: <20211202215507.298415-1-zohar@linux.ibm.com> <20211202215507.298415-5-zohar@linux.ibm.com> <56c53b027ae8ae6909d38904bf089e73011657d7.camel@linux.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <56c53b027ae8ae6909d38904bf089e73011657d7.camel@linux.ibm.com> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Dec 31, 2021 at 10:35:00AM -0500, Mimi Zohar wrote: > Hi Eric, > > On Thu, 2021-12-02 at 14:07 -0800, Eric Biggers wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 02, 2021 at 04:55:06PM -0500, Mimi Zohar wrote: > > > case IMA_VERITY_DIGSIG: > > > - fallthrough; > > > + set_bit(IMA_DIGSIG, &iint->atomic_flags); > > > + > > > + /* > > > + * The IMA signature is based on a hash of IMA_VERITY_DIGSIG > > > + * and the fs-verity file digest, not directly on the > > > + * fs-verity file digest. Both digests should probably be > > > + * included in the IMA measurement list, but for now this > > > + * digest is only used for verifying the IMA signature. > > > + */ > > > + verity_digest[0] = IMA_VERITY_DIGSIG; > > > + memcpy(verity_digest + 1, iint->ima_hash->digest, > > > + iint->ima_hash->length); > > > + > > > + hash.hdr.algo = iint->ima_hash->algo; > > > + hash.hdr.length = iint->ima_hash->length; > > > > This is still wrong because the bytes being signed don't include the hash > > algorithm. Unless you mean for it to be implicitly always SHA-256? fs-verity > > supports SHA-512 too, and it may support other hash algorithms in the future. > > IMA assumes that the file hash algorithm and the signature algorithm > are the same. If they're not the same, for whatever reason, the > signature verification would simply fail. > > Based on the v2 signature header 'type' field, IMA can differentiate > between regular IMA file hash based signatures and fs-verity file > digest based signatures. The digest field (d-ng) in the IMA > meausrement list prefixes the digest with the hash algorithm. I'm > missing the reason for needing to hash fs-verity's file digest with > other metadata, and sign that hash rather than fs-verity's file digest > directly. Because if someone signs a raw hash, then they also implicitly sign the same hash value for all supported hash algorithms that produce the same length hash. Signing a raw hash is only appropriate when there is only 1 supported algorithm. All the other stuff you mentioned is irrelevant. - Eric