Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Sat, 26 Feb 2022 09:07:42 +0100
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To:     Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com>
Cc:     Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@huawei.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>,
        "revest@chromium.org" <revest@chromium.org>,
        "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 v2 0/6] bpf-lsm: Extend interoperability with IMA
Message-ID: <YhnfzipoU1NbkjQQ@kroah.com>
References: <20220215124042.186506-1-roberto.sassu@huawei.com>
 <408a96085814b2578486b2859e63ff906f5e5876.camel@linux.ibm.com>
 <5117c79227ce4b9d97e193fd8fb59ba2@huawei.com>
 <223d9eedc03f68cfa4f1624c4673e844e29da7d5.camel@linux.ibm.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <223d9eedc03f68cfa4f1624c4673e844e29da7d5.camel@linux.ibm.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Feb 25, 2022 at 02:11:04PM -0500, Mimi Zohar wrote:
> On Fri, 2022-02-25 at 08:41 +0000, Roberto Sassu wrote:
> > > From: Mimi Zohar [mailto:zohar@linux.ibm.com]
> > > Sent: Friday, February 25, 2022 1:22 AM
> > > Hi Roberto,
> > > 
> > > On Tue, 2022-02-15 at 13:40 +0100, Roberto Sassu wrote:
> > > > Extend the interoperability with IMA, to give wider flexibility for the
> > > > implementation of integrity-focused LSMs based on eBPF.
> > > 
> > > I've previously requested adding eBPF module measurements and signature
> > > verification support in IMA.  There seemed to be some interest, but
> > > nothing has been posted.
> > 
> > Hi Mimi
> > 
> > for my use case, DIGLIM eBPF, IMA integrity verification is
> > needed until the binary carrying the eBPF program is executed
> > as the init process. I've been thinking to use an appended
> > signature to overcome the limitation of lack of xattrs in the
> > initial ram disk.
> 
> I would still like to see xattrs supported in the initial ram disk. 
> Assuming you're still interested in pursuing it, someone would need to
> review and upstream it.  Greg?

Me?  How about the filesystem maintainers and developers?  :)

There's a reason we never added xattrs support to ram disks, but I can't
remember why...

thanks,

gre gk-h