Received: by 2002:a25:4158:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id o85csp1388727yba; Thu, 9 May 2019 16:01:44 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwNYMjAGlus9G5BoSKoTetqvgj4I8zO8TXKzR2xPkjPoM+Rm9OOeGFBCN2HX7Glk2IA4SWM X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:4503:: with SMTP id m3mr8595163pld.97.1557442904529; Thu, 09 May 2019 16:01:44 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1557442904; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=NBHRD6FnEvHlufsdYAjCU3Cg66yRoJOAydXw/TwXRmfqqqJLfVH5r4hDlLXwT57wzT kLlGgLdSucamm/t60xuPjo/ukUFusiRQFWfF+ZncE9PbcSOiPIzN1B0WfTne1LvClROe Hklsuz3sG8kzV5T8LaZcaGsY0JWgyB4KAkeon8yiLVL+ZsHgQd+VaELOdlVxgN0AyK71 lBqSUGqLekTLV70lEMpaR1eLb4AlzEhVB1r4jwlg1rchkT4nVu1xoFONgRTlzgkFBkIn 0HQpiZ9KRBj0u5j0vDk1TzYrSVuH08VACd78rGPCtbIUxyPhaTp99TGZOuF0Dcd6kL66 +YfA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:message-id:content-transfer-encoding :mime-version:references:in-reply-to:date:cc:to:from:subject; bh=BaKdo/FZ6S67werACIzLqlp29Aaj2O91938F4CpSviw=; b=C0FxJWsKmpY/bKJTs9nXFJmWnBzJjYf3hn7dp5MPh/ckYPqSo3dvKzSQmvJqt/fEkk cG0/2OPjisYqjstAvnarHZHjYkuS9Io0mbhO8QfZSh/cJhDZMcTVuvBPdbClmJZE+/eJ CD0skdlXVq+A9HEaURB8iCG+AL1C1+V9vFqQKxozQ76C3ze0t4VteO4YKNDsalz6nN2u icBveQfHDjaLB4zNlVkjJFHn6UaMK8owR+x0UOxjU8YabqrDXV+x4pnbInFDFYHHeLcZ /zMgNCzpX07wajU3qnTFiLeRh46eMKbgTLX6SCTj2BZ9ijotX2Gr8Q6SeOsOC2MM8VCo bvSA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-crypto-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-crypto-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=ibm.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id t139si859365pfc.192.2019.05.09.16.01.23; Thu, 09 May 2019 16:01:44 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-crypto-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-crypto-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-crypto-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=ibm.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726704AbfEIXBU (ORCPT + 99 others); Thu, 9 May 2019 19:01:20 -0400 Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.156.1]:41508 "EHLO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726219AbfEIXBU (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 May 2019 19:01:20 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098404.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id x49Mpfb5136440 for ; Thu, 9 May 2019 19:01:19 -0400 Received: from e06smtp02.uk.ibm.com (e06smtp02.uk.ibm.com [195.75.94.98]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2scuyktud4-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Thu, 09 May 2019 19:01:19 -0400 Received: from localhost by e06smtp02.uk.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Fri, 10 May 2019 00:01:16 +0100 Received: from b06cxnps4075.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (9.149.109.197) by e06smtp02.uk.ibm.com (192.168.101.132) with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted; (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256/256) Fri, 10 May 2019 00:01:11 +0100 Received: from b06wcsmtp001.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (b06wcsmtp001.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.105.160]) by b06cxnps4075.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id x49N1AMv42991828 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 9 May 2019 23:01:10 GMT Received: from b06wcsmtp001.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 53B33A405C; Thu, 9 May 2019 23:01:10 +0000 (GMT) Received: from b06wcsmtp001.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 904E9A406B; Thu, 9 May 2019 23:01:08 +0000 (GMT) Received: from dhcp-9-31-103-88.watson.ibm.com (unknown [9.31.103.88]) by b06wcsmtp001.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Thu, 9 May 2019 23:01:08 +0000 (GMT) Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 09/12] ima: Implement support for module-style appended signatures From: Mimi Zohar To: Thiago Jung Bauermann , linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org Cc: linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, keyrings@vger.kernel.org, linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Dmitry Kasatkin , James Morris , "Serge E. Hallyn" , David Howells , David Woodhouse , Jessica Yu , Herbert Xu , "David S. Miller" , Jonathan Corbet , "AKASHI, Takahiro" Date: Thu, 09 May 2019 19:01:08 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20190418035120.2354-10-bauerman@linux.ibm.com> References: <20190418035120.2354-1-bauerman@linux.ibm.com> <20190418035120.2354-10-bauerman@linux.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.20.5 (3.20.5-1.fc24) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 x-cbid: 19050923-0008-0000-0000-000002E51248 X-IBM-AV-DETECTION: SAVI=unused REMOTE=unused XFE=unused x-cbparentid: 19050923-0009-0000-0000-000022519B3D Message-Id: <1557442868.10635.87.camel@linux.ibm.com> X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:,, definitions=2019-05-09_02:,, signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=3 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=956 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1810050000 definitions=main-1905090130 Sender: linux-crypto-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org Hi Thiago, > diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c b/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c > index fca7a3f23321..a7a20a8c15c1 100644 > --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c > +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c > @@ -1144,6 +1144,12 @@ void ima_delete_rules(void) > } > } > > +#define __ima_hook_stringify(str) (#str), > + > +const char *const func_tokens[] = { > + __ima_hooks(__ima_hook_stringify) > +}; > + > #ifdef CONFIG_IMA_READ_POLICY > enum { > mask_exec = 0, mask_write, mask_read, mask_append > @@ -1156,12 +1162,6 @@ static const char *const mask_tokens[] = { > "MAY_APPEND" > }; > > -#define __ima_hook_stringify(str) (#str), > - > -static const char *const func_tokens[] = { > - __ima_hooks(__ima_hook_stringify) > -}; > - > void *ima_policy_start(struct seq_file *m, loff_t *pos) > { > loff_t l = *pos; Is moving this something left over from previous versions or there is a need for this change? Other than this, the patch looks good. Mimi