Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:413:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id 19csp3514553pxp; Tue, 8 Mar 2022 16:21:57 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyx7C0bitHrYXvt1QE6E4HUHCD+IC7GI/gFsZjzTVHeZPYo/fjwg046tMSUg3DFdDZcvqGZ X-Received: by 2002:a62:7b55:0:b0:4f6:adc7:c306 with SMTP id w82-20020a627b55000000b004f6adc7c306mr20939086pfc.29.1646785317160; Tue, 08 Mar 2022 16:21:57 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1646785317; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=b05pj46YA6zseJXz/6rThGBwTcNflMqNPD5CatrbJKeQO72aryTd3NjyInAiuRBcl7 qbad5OQObEkw3PkVJfBu9zCfvS+6YCz/ttkdx25y53OJrHRU38yKGmmMyTzzd5WHakuO 4GxZE1IuQyMec/3pW1E1Ao4f2LrD2EW6BjJoU8RhjAzGVRo7NUl3uSrw37RAAIot3P6x /DFq9ullxPVLYGV7hJYi5A0BsgukfpqrVRGQ/W7rElfocRIas0bMF5d79lVzJ5Zdwb8s Kqeeqvz092rqFOLYlr+shifn7YBtkLaquoWACLN0jk413sXnz1GaOHSjFJcFf1xp0dMr gYHA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding :content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc :to:from:date:dkim-signature; bh=ixaqRPOwlQo8e0sCrCkylBjAYJwCEl+v89eAcbP+3l8=; b=ywxs/2GbcCSZmLdCBphmWqVLOq2cuP1xSq4FY3an5x+otltDUGMFNoX7VpGTqKLnM2 gyvlzouJyZVt1pKbpf5NsTCVyaTYuIhMWJMQGBGdTyvazJkjHluJUFEr0DJnAC/EIPfO NZDcRCqQ7vbGHmB7S6+Tvihk1m97B7KM5ac+yNaGoEhGnaxoOtd8GXaanps4x9UxAgL9 i9jPqvXwK8qDPSNE2sYjuzAQsZbPAEAvEIZDtxo4p8znfv9BTogNGPz8dy27D+Cfhz5I rZ6oEbtM0kwxhhyAizqCnb6CUY051us21dLClxzti5RVFwDrS+eAyV07dj8QDDlL2EXx 2MBw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@kernel.org header.s=k20201202 header.b=bmzxexaQ; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-crypto-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-crypto-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (lindbergh.monkeyblade.net. [2620:137:e000::1:18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id u24-20020a63f658000000b003789b050ba7si323128pgj.411.2022.03.08.16.21.56 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 08 Mar 2022 16:21:57 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-crypto-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:18 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:18; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@kernel.org header.s=k20201202 header.b=bmzxexaQ; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-crypto-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-crypto-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=kernel.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 453771029D0; Tue, 8 Mar 2022 15:46:13 -0800 (PST) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S239183AbiCHNVF (ORCPT + 99 others); Tue, 8 Mar 2022 08:21:05 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:42620 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S233857AbiCHNVE (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Mar 2022 08:21:04 -0500 Received: from dfw.source.kernel.org (dfw.source.kernel.org [IPv6:2604:1380:4641:c500::1]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E113449687; Tue, 8 Mar 2022 05:20:07 -0800 (PST) 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 dfw.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 749F460F64; Tue, 8 Mar 2022 13:20:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 86EACC340EB; Tue, 8 Mar 2022 13:20:06 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1646745606; bh=tGU5octn4cnB/mw4Ty6XIGrMXCKfoNOlJmYFqPsROs8=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=bmzxexaQQ0kY3kfIrJx+99W6CMIOM42SQZoQnI21ZzLUYMKc6TW/DrO7X5dfPb5z1 vbiqp2JEUnRhjWQhgBPLZKgFCmg5QMekJqLhLd/t8VmcfsDB8QfFwRBphkRZtYefZF 89+s3qT2JUKDpkK4RH0Cwu+H5h036F4+B19gsmynKNqcZx7xda74j1zRhkcEDAw8x4 eQ2jzy5w5ct6mKWrNBft8NuoF4ccAtFcrXJwr3uspBvv/SUupEmOQemDHN3LMmXO/6 ok0KPwq2qbYuY01h/JLYijter/+2oGAJ/e5AROgfYt5nkr+VDo3iz3OxdTZOGD211Y LXeFmYG+G0eSg== Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2022 15:19:26 +0200 From: Jarkko Sakkinen To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Micka=EBl_Sala=FCn?= Cc: David Howells , David Woodhouse , "David S . Miller" , Eric Snowberg , Herbert Xu , James Morris , =?iso-8859-1?Q?Micka=EBl_Sala=FCn?= , Mimi Zohar , "Serge E . Hallyn" , Tyler Hicks , keyrings@vger.kernel.org, linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org, linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 5/5] certs: Allow root user to append signed hashes to the blacklist keyring Message-ID: References: <20210712170313.884724-1-mic@digikod.net> <20210712170313.884724-6-mic@digikod.net> <995fc93b-531b-9840-1523-21ae2adbe4ba@digikod.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <995fc93b-531b-9840-1523-21ae2adbe4ba@digikod.net> X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, RDNS_NONE,SPF_HELO_NONE,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on lindbergh.monkeyblade.net Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Mar 08, 2022 at 01:18:28PM +0100, Micka?l Sala?n wrote: > > On 08/03/2022 12:53, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 12, 2021 at 07:03:13PM +0200, Micka?l Sala?n wrote: > > > From: Micka?l Sala?n > > > > > > Add a kernel option SYSTEM_BLACKLIST_AUTH_UPDATE to enable the root user > > > to dynamically add new keys to the blacklist keyring. This enables to > > > invalidate new certificates, either from being loaded in a keyring, or > > > from being trusted in a PKCS#7 certificate chain. This also enables to > > > add new file hashes to be denied by the integrity infrastructure. > > > > > > Being able to untrust a certificate which could have normaly been > > > trusted is a sensitive operation. This is why adding new hashes to the > > > blacklist keyring is only allowed when these hashes are signed and > > > vouched by the builtin trusted keyring. A blacklist hash is stored as a > > > key description. The PKCS#7 signature of this description must be > > > provided as the key payload. > > > > > > Marking a certificate as untrusted should be enforced while the system > > > is running. It is then forbiden to remove such blacklist keys. > > > > > > Update blacklist keyring, blacklist key and revoked certificate access rights: > > > * allows the root user to search for a specific blacklisted hash, which > > > make sense because the descriptions are already viewable; > > > * forbids key update (blacklist and asymmetric ones); > > > * restricts kernel rights on the blacklist keyring to align with the > > > root user rights. > > > > > > See help in tools/certs/print-cert-tbs-hash.sh . > > > > > > Cc: David Howells > > > Cc: David Woodhouse > > > Cc: Eric Snowberg > > > Cc: Jarkko Sakkinen > > > Signed-off-by: Micka?l Sala?n > > > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210712170313.884724-6-mic@digikod.net > > > --- > > > > > > Changes since v6: > > > * Rebase on keys-cve-2020-26541-v3: commit ebd9c2ae369a ("integrity: > > > Load mokx variables into the blacklist keyring"). > > > > > > Changes since v5: > > > * Rebase on keys-next, fix Kconfig conflict, and update the asymmetric > > > key rights added to the blacklist keyring by the new > > > add_key_to_revocation_list(): align with blacklist key rights by > > > removing KEY_POS_WRITE as a safeguard, and add > > > KEY_ALLOC_BYPASS_RESTRICTION to not be subject to > > > restrict_link_for_blacklist() that only allows blacklist key types to > > > be added to the keyring. > > > * Change the return code for restrict_link_for_blacklist() from -EPERM > > > to -EOPNOTSUPP to align with asymmetric key keyrings. > > > > > > Changes since v3: > > > * Update commit message for print-cert-tbs-hash.sh . > > > > > > Changes since v2: > > > * Add comment for blacklist_key_instantiate(). > > > --- > > > certs/Kconfig | 10 +++++ > > > certs/blacklist.c | 96 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------- > > > 2 files changed, 85 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/certs/Kconfig b/certs/Kconfig > > > index 0fbe184ceca5..e0e524b7eff9 100644 > > > --- a/certs/Kconfig > > > +++ b/certs/Kconfig > > > @@ -103,4 +103,14 @@ config SYSTEM_REVOCATION_KEYS > > > containing X.509 certificates to be included in the default blacklist > > > keyring. > > > +config SYSTEM_BLACKLIST_AUTH_UPDATE > > > + bool "Allow root to add signed blacklist keys" > > > + depends on SYSTEM_BLACKLIST_KEYRING > > > + depends on SYSTEM_DATA_VERIFICATION > > > + help > > > + If set, provide the ability to load new blacklist keys at run time if > > > + they are signed and vouched by a certificate from the builtin trusted > > > + keyring. The PKCS#7 signature of the description is set in the key > > > + payload. Blacklist keys cannot be removed. > > > + > > > endmenu > > > diff --git a/certs/blacklist.c b/certs/blacklist.c > > > index b254c87ceb3a..486ce0dd8e9c 100644 > > > --- a/certs/blacklist.c > > > +++ b/certs/blacklist.c > > > @@ -15,6 +15,7 @@ > > > #include > > > #include > > > #include > > > +#include > > > #include > > > #include "blacklist.h" > > > #include "common.h" > > > @@ -26,6 +27,9 @@ > > > */ > > > #define MAX_HASH_LEN 128 > > > +#define BLACKLIST_KEY_PERM (KEY_POS_SEARCH | KEY_POS_VIEW | \ > > > + KEY_USR_SEARCH | KEY_USR_VIEW) > > > + > > > static const char tbs_prefix[] = "tbs"; > > > static const char bin_prefix[] = "bin"; > > > @@ -80,19 +84,51 @@ static int blacklist_vet_description(const char *desc) > > > return 0; > > > } > > > -/* > > > - * The hash to be blacklisted is expected to be in the description. There will > > > - * be no payload. > > > - */ > > > -static int blacklist_preparse(struct key_preparsed_payload *prep) > > > +static int blacklist_key_instantiate(struct key *key, > > > + struct key_preparsed_payload *prep) > > > { > > > - if (prep->datalen > 0) > > > - return -EINVAL; > > > - return 0; > > > +#ifdef CONFIG_SYSTEM_BLACKLIST_AUTH_UPDATE > > > + int err; > > > +#endif > > > + > > > + /* Sets safe default permissions for keys loaded by user space. */ > > > + key->perm = BLACKLIST_KEY_PERM; > > > + > > > + /* > > > + * Skips the authentication step for builtin hashes, they are not > > > + * signed but still trusted. > > > + */ > > > + if (key->flags & (1 << KEY_FLAG_BUILTIN)) > > > + goto out; > > > + > > > +#ifdef CONFIG_SYSTEM_BLACKLIST_AUTH_UPDATE > > > + /* > > > + * Verifies the description's PKCS#7 signature against the builtin > > > + * trusted keyring. > > > + */ > > > + err = verify_pkcs7_signature(key->description, > > > + strlen(key->description), prep->data, prep->datalen, > > > + NULL, VERIFYING_UNSPECIFIED_SIGNATURE, NULL, NULL); > > > + if (err) > > > + return err; > > > +#else > > > + /* > > > + * It should not be possible to come here because the keyring doesn't > > > + * have KEY_USR_WRITE and the only other way to call this function is > > > + * for builtin hashes. > > > + */ > > > + WARN_ON_ONCE(1); > > > + return -EPERM; > > > +#endif > > > + > > > +out: > > > + return generic_key_instantiate(key, prep); > > > } > > > -static void blacklist_free_preparse(struct key_preparsed_payload *prep) > > > +static int blacklist_key_update(struct key *key, > > > + struct key_preparsed_payload *prep) > > > { > > > + return -EPERM; > > > } > > > static void blacklist_describe(const struct key *key, struct seq_file *m) > > > @@ -103,9 +139,8 @@ static void blacklist_describe(const struct key *key, struct seq_file *m) > > > static struct key_type key_type_blacklist = { > > > .name = "blacklist", > > > .vet_description = blacklist_vet_description, > > > - .preparse = blacklist_preparse, > > > - .free_preparse = blacklist_free_preparse, > > > - .instantiate = generic_key_instantiate, > > > + .instantiate = blacklist_key_instantiate, > > > + .update = blacklist_key_update, > > > .describe = blacklist_describe, > > > }; > > > @@ -154,8 +189,7 @@ static int mark_raw_hash_blacklisted(const char *hash) > > > hash, > > > NULL, > > > 0, > > > - ((KEY_POS_ALL & ~KEY_POS_SETATTR) | > > > - KEY_USR_VIEW), > > > + BLACKLIST_KEY_PERM, > > > KEY_ALLOC_NOT_IN_QUOTA | > > > KEY_ALLOC_BUILT_IN); > > > if (IS_ERR(key)) { > > > @@ -232,8 +266,10 @@ int add_key_to_revocation_list(const char *data, size_t size) > > > NULL, > > > data, > > > size, > > > - ((KEY_POS_ALL & ~KEY_POS_SETATTR) | KEY_USR_VIEW), > > > - KEY_ALLOC_NOT_IN_QUOTA | KEY_ALLOC_BUILT_IN); > > > + KEY_POS_VIEW | KEY_POS_READ | KEY_POS_SEARCH > > > + | KEY_USR_VIEW, > > > + KEY_ALLOC_NOT_IN_QUOTA | KEY_ALLOC_BUILT_IN > > > + | KEY_ALLOC_BYPASS_RESTRICTION); > > > if (IS_ERR(key)) { > > > pr_err("Problem with revocation key (%ld)\n", PTR_ERR(key)); > > > @@ -260,25 +296,43 @@ int is_key_on_revocation_list(struct pkcs7_message *pkcs7) > > > } > > > #endif > > > +static int restrict_link_for_blacklist(struct key *dest_keyring, > > > + const struct key_type *type, const union key_payload *payload, > > > + struct key *restrict_key) > > > +{ > > > + if (type == &key_type_blacklist) > > > + return 0; > > > + return -EOPNOTSUPP; > > > +} > > > + > > > /* > > > * Initialise the blacklist > > > */ > > > static int __init blacklist_init(void) > > > { > > > const char *const *bl; > > > + struct key_restriction *restriction; > > > if (register_key_type(&key_type_blacklist) < 0) > > > panic("Can't allocate system blacklist key type\n"); > > > + restriction = kzalloc(sizeof(*restriction), GFP_KERNEL); > > > + if (!restriction) > > > + panic("Can't allocate blacklist keyring restriction\n"); > > > > > > This prevents me from taking this to my pull request. In moderns standards, > > no new BUG_ON(), panic() etc. should never added to the kernel. > > > > I missed this in my review. > > > > This should rather be e.g. > > > > restriction = kzalloc(sizeof(*restriction), GFP_KERNEL); > > if (!restriction) { > > pr_err("Can't allocate blacklist keyring restriction\n"); > > return 0; > > } > > > > Unfortunately I need to drop this patch set, because adding new panic() > > is simply a no-go. > > I agree that panic() is not great in general, but I followed the other part > of the code (just above) that do the same. This part of the kernel should > failed if critical memory allocation failed at boot time (only). It doesn't > impact the kernel once it is running. I don't think that just ignoring this > error with return 0 is fine, after all it's a critical error right? It's not good reason enough to crash the whole kernel, even if it is a critical error (e.g. run-time foresincs). Even WARN() is not recommended these days [*]. For the existing panic()-statements: I'm happy to review patches that render them out. Not sure tho, if this fails should it be then "everything blacklisted". Just one thing to consider. > Calling panic() seems OK here. Is there a better way to stop the kernel for > such critical error? If the kernel cannot allocate memory at this time, it > would be useless to try continuing booting. [*] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-sgx/YA0tvOGp%2FshchVhu@kroah.com/ BR, Jarkko