> From: Mimi Zohar [mailto:zohar@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Sunday, March 6, 2022 8:24 PM > On Wed, 2022-03-02 at 12:13 +0100, Roberto Sassu wrote: > > Extend the interoperability with IMA, to give wider flexibility for the > > implementation of integrity-focused LSMs based on eBPF. > > > > Patch 1 fixes some style issues. > > > > Patches 2-6 give the ability to eBPF-based LSMs to take advantage of the > > measurement capability of IMA without needing to setup a policy in IMA > > (those LSMs might implement the policy capability themselves). > > > > Patches 7-9 allow eBPF-based LSMs to evaluate files read by the kernel. > > The tests seem to only work when neither a builtin IMA policy or a > custom policy is previously loaded. Hi Mimi unfortunately yes. If there are more generic rules, the number of samples differs from that expected. For example, if you have an existing rule like: measure func=BPRM_CHECK mask=MAY_EXEC you will have: test_test_ima:PASS:run_measured_process #1 0 nsec test_test_ima:FAIL:num_samples_or_err unexpected num_samples_or_err: actual 2 != expected 1 Test #1 fails because also ima_setup.sh is measured. Thanks Roberto HUAWEI TECHNOLOGIES Duesseldorf GmbH, HRB 56063 Managing Director: Li Peng, Zhong Ronghua
