From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To: Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-security-module <linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-ima-devel@lists.sourceforge.net,
Dave Young <dyoung@redhat.com>,
kexec@lists.infradead.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Thiago Jung Bauermann <bauerman@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Subject: Re: [PATHC v2 0/9] ima: carry the measurement list across kexec
Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2016 14:47:13 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87lgyrsk3i.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1473954263.2526.88.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (Mimi Zohar's message of "Thu, 15 Sep 2016 11:44:23 -0400")
Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> writes:
> Hi Andrew,
>
> On Wed, 2016-08-31 at 18:38 -0400, Mimi Zohar wrote:
>> On Wed, 2016-08-31 at 13:50 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
>> > On Tue, 30 Aug 2016 18:40:02 -0400 Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > > The TPM PCRs are only reset on a hard reboot. In order to validate a
>> > > TPM's quote after a soft reboot (eg. kexec -e), the IMA measurement list
>> > > of the running kernel must be saved and then restored on the subsequent
>> > > boot, possibly of a different architecture.
>> > >
>> > > The existing securityfs binary_runtime_measurements file conveniently
>> > > provides a serialized format of the IMA measurement list. This patch
>> > > set serializes the measurement list in this format and restores it.
>> > >
>> > > Up to now, the binary_runtime_measurements was defined as architecture
>> > > native format. The assumption being that userspace could and would
>> > > handle any architecture conversions. With the ability of carrying the
>> > > measurement list across kexec, possibly from one architecture to a
>> > > different one, the per boot architecture information is lost and with it
>> > > the ability of recalculating the template digest hash. To resolve this
>> > > problem, without breaking the existing ABI, this patch set introduces
>> > > the boot command line option "ima_canonical_fmt", which is arbitrarily
>> > > defined as little endian.
>> > >
>> > > The need for this boot command line option will be limited to the
>> > > existing version 1 format of the binary_runtime_measurements.
>> > > Subsequent formats will be defined as canonical format (eg. TPM 2.0
>> > > support for larger digests).
>> > >
>> > > This patch set pre-req's Thiago Bauermann's "kexec_file: Add buffer
>> > > hand-over for the next kernel" patch set.
>> > >
>> > > These patches can also be found in the next-kexec-restore branch of:
>> > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/zohar/linux-integrity.git
>> >
>> > I'll merge these into -mm to get some linux-next exposure. I don't
>> > know what your upstream merge plans will be?
>>
>> Sounds good. I'm hoping to get some review/comments on this patch set
>> as well. At the moment, I'm chasing down a kernel test robot report
>> from this afternoon.
>
> My concern about changing the canonical format as originally defined in
> patch 9/9 from big endian to little endian never materialized. Andreas
> Steffan, the patch author, is happy either way.
>
> We proposed two methods of addressing Eric Biederman's concerns of not
> including the IMA measurement list segment in the kexec hash as
> described in https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/9/9/355.
>
> - defer calculating and verifying the serialized IMA measurement list
> buffer hash to IMA
> - calculate the kexec hash on load, verify it on the kexec execute,
> before re-calculating and updating it.
I need to ask: How this is anticipated to interact with kexec on panic?
Because honestly I can't see this ever working in that case. The
assumption is that the original kernel has gone crazy. So from a
practical standpoint any trusted path should have been invalided.
This entire idea of updating the kexec image makes me extremely
extremely nervious. It feels like sticking a screw driver through the
spokes of your bicicle tires while ridding down the road.
I can see tracking to see if the list has changed at some
point and causing a reboot(LINUX_REBOOT_CMD_KEXEC) to fail.
At least the common bootloader cases that I know of using kexec are very
minimal distributions that live in a ramdisk and as such it should be
very straight forward to measure what is needed at or before
sys_kexec_load. But that was completely dismissed as unrealistic so I
don't have a clue what actual problem you are trying to solve.
If there is anyway we can start small and not with this big scary
infrastructure change I would very much prefer it.
Eric
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-09-16 20:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-08-30 22:40 Mimi Zohar
2016-08-30 22:40 ` [PATHC v2 1/9] ima: on soft reboot, restore the measurement list Mimi Zohar
2016-08-30 22:40 ` [PATHC v2 2/9] ima: permit duplicate measurement list entries Mimi Zohar
2016-08-30 22:40 ` [PATHC v2 3/9] ima: maintain memory size needed for serializing the measurement list Mimi Zohar
2016-08-30 22:40 ` [PATHC v2 4/9] ima: serialize the binary_runtime_measurements Mimi Zohar
2016-08-30 22:40 ` [PATHC v2 5/9] ima: on soft reboot, save the measurement list Mimi Zohar
2016-09-01 1:57 ` Dave Young
2016-09-02 13:22 ` Mimi Zohar
2016-08-30 22:40 ` [PATHC v2 6/9] ima: store the builtin/custom template definitions in a list Mimi Zohar
2016-08-30 22:40 ` [PATHC v2 7/9] ima: support restoring multiple template formats Mimi Zohar
2016-08-30 22:40 ` [PATHC v2 8/9] ima: define a canonical binary_runtime_measurements list format Mimi Zohar
2016-08-30 22:40 ` [PATHC v2 9/9] ima: platform-independent hash value Mimi Zohar
2016-08-31 20:50 ` [PATHC v2 0/9] ima: carry the measurement list across kexec Andrew Morton
2016-08-31 22:38 ` Mimi Zohar
2016-09-15 15:44 ` Mimi Zohar
2016-09-16 19:47 ` Eric W. Biederman [this message]
2016-09-16 21:03 ` Eric W. Biederman
2016-09-16 23:32 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2016-09-17 5:17 ` Eric W. Biederman
2016-09-18 21:25 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2016-09-20 16:07 ` Eric W. Biederman
2016-09-26 18:31 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2016-09-29 21:43 ` Eric W. Biederman
2016-09-29 22:21 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87lgyrsk3i.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org \
--to=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=bauerman@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=dyoung@redhat.com \
--cc=kexec@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-ima-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
--cc=zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®