Received-SPF: softfail (google.com: domain of transitioning linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org does not designate 23.128.96.19 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.19;
From:   Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@huawei.com>
To:     Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com>,
        "shuah@kernel.org" <shuah@kernel.org>,
        "ast@kernel.org" <ast@kernel.org>,
        "daniel@iogearbox.net" <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
        "andrii@kernel.org" <andrii@kernel.org>,
        "kpsingh@kernel.org" <kpsingh@kernel.org>,
        Florent Revest <revest@chromium.org>
CC:     "linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org" <linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org" 
        <linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org>,
        "netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
        "bpf@vger.kernel.org" <bpf@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] ima: Calculate digest in ima_inode_hash() if not
 available
Thread-Topic: [PATCH] ima: Calculate digest in ima_inode_hash() if not
 available
Thread-Index: AQHYHzTu9kKzqhEAHUiW0cSG9MzvPayRZbiAgAHZaqA=
Date:   Mon, 14 Feb 2022 17:05:57 +0000
Message-ID: <cc6bcb7742dc432ba990ee38b5909496@huawei.com>
References: <20220211104828.4061334-1-roberto.sassu@huawei.com>
 <537635732d9cbcc42bcf7be5ed932d284b03d39f.camel@linux.ibm.com>
In-Reply-To: <537635732d9cbcc42bcf7be5ed932d284b03d39f.camel@linux.ibm.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Precedence: bulk

> From: Mimi Zohar [mailto:zohar@linux.ibm.com]
> Sent: Sunday, February 13, 2022 2:06 PM
> Hi Roberto,
> 
> On Fri, 2022-02-11 at 11:48 +0100, Roberto Sassu wrote:
> > __ima_inode_hash() checks if a digest has been already calculated by
> > looking for the integrity_iint_cache structure associated to the passed
> > inode.
> >
> > Users of ima_file_hash() and ima_inode_hash() (e.g. eBPF) might be
> > interested in obtaining the information without having to setup an IMA
> > policy so that the digest is always available at the time they call one of
> > those functions.
> >
> > Open a new file descriptor in __ima_inode_hash(), so that this function
> > could invoke ima_collect_measurement() to calculate the digest if it is not
> > available. Still return -EOPNOTSUPP if the calculation failed.
> >
> > Instead of opening a new file descriptor, the one from ima_file_hash()
> > could have been used. However, since ima_inode_hash() was created to
> obtain
> > the digest when the file descriptor is not available, it could benefit from
> > this change too. Also, the opened file descriptor might be not suitable for
> > use (file descriptor opened not for reading).
> >
> > This change does not cause memory usage increase, due to using a temporary
> > integrity_iint_cache structure for the digest calculation, and due to
> > freeing the ima_digest_data structure inside integrity_iint_cache before
> > exiting from __ima_inode_hash().
> >
> > Finally, update the test by removing ima_setup.sh (it is not necessary
> > anymore to set an IMA policy) and by directly executing /bin/true.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@huawei.com>
> 
> Although this patch doesn't directly modify either ima_file_hash() or
> ima_inode_hash(),  this change affects both functions.  ima_file_hash()
> was introduced to be used with eBPF.  Based on Florent's post, changing
> the ima_file_hash() behavor seems fine.  Since I have no idea whether
> anyone is still using ima_inode_hash(), perhaps it would be safer to
> limit this behavior change to just ima_file_hash().

Hi Mimi

ok.

I found that just checking that iint->ima_hash is not NULL is not enough
(ima_inode_hash() might still return the old digest after a file write).
Should I replace that check with !(iint->flags & IMA_COLLECTED)?
Or should I do only for ima_file_hash() and recalculate the digest
if necessary?

> Please update the ima_file_hash() doc.  While touching this area, I'd
> appreciate your fixing the first doc line in both ima_file_hash() and
> ima_inode_hash() cases, which wraps spanning two lines.

Did you mean to make the description shorter or to have everything
in one line? According to the kernel documentation (kernel-doc.rst),
having the brief description in multiple lines should be fine.

> Please split the IMA from the eBPF changes.

Ok.

Thanks

Roberto

HUAWEI TECHNOLOGIES Duesseldorf GmbH, HRB 56063
Managing Director: Li Peng, Zhong Ronghua

> --
> thanks,
> 
> Mimi