On Tue, 6 Sept 2022 at 10:08, Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, 2022-09-06 at 04:57 +0200, Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi wrote: > > On Mon, 5 Sept 2022 at 16:35, Roberto Sassu > > <roberto.sassu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > From: Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > Add the bpf_verify_pkcs7_signature() kfunc, to give eBPF security > > > modules > > > the ability to check the validity of a signature against supplied > > > data, by > > > using user-provided or system-provided keys as trust anchor. > > > > > > The new kfunc makes it possible to enforce mandatory policies, as > > > eBPF > > > programs might be allowed to make security decisions only based on > > > data > > > sources the system administrator approves. > > > > > > The caller should provide the data to be verified and the signature > > > as eBPF > > > dynamic pointers (to minimize the number of parameters) and a > > > bpf_key > > > structure containing a reference to the keyring with keys trusted > > > for > > > signature verification, obtained from bpf_lookup_user_key() or > > > bpf_lookup_system_key(). > > > > > > For bpf_key structures obtained from the former lookup function, > > > bpf_verify_pkcs7_signature() completes the permission check > > > deferred by > > > that function by calling key_validate(). key_task_permission() is > > > already > > > called by the PKCS#7 code. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > Acked-by: KP Singh <kpsingh@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > --- > > > kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c | 45 > > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > > 1 file changed, 45 insertions(+) > > > > > > diff --git a/kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c b/kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c > > > index 7a7023704ac2..8e2c026b0a58 100644 > > > --- a/kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c > > > +++ b/kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c > > > @@ -1294,12 +1294,57 @@ void bpf_key_put(struct bpf_key *bkey) > > > kfree(bkey); > > > } > > > > > > +#ifdef CONFIG_SYSTEM_DATA_VERIFICATION > > > +/** > > > + * bpf_verify_pkcs7_signature - verify a PKCS#7 signature > > > + * @data_ptr: data to verify > > > + * @sig_ptr: signature of the data > > > + * @trusted_keyring: keyring with keys trusted for signature > > > verification > > > + * > > > + * Verify the PKCS#7 signature *sig_ptr* against the supplied > > > *data_ptr* > > > + * with keys in a keyring referenced by *trusted_keyring*. > > > + * > > > + * Return: 0 on success, a negative value on error. > > > + */ > > > +int bpf_verify_pkcs7_signature(struct bpf_dynptr_kern *data_ptr, > > > + struct bpf_dynptr_kern *sig_ptr, > > > + struct bpf_key *trusted_keyring) > > > +{ > > > + int ret; > > > + > > > + if (trusted_keyring->has_ref) { > > > + /* > > > + * Do the permission check deferred in > > > bpf_lookup_user_key(). > > > + * See bpf_lookup_user_key() for more details. > > > + * > > > + * A call to key_task_permission() here would be > > > redundant, as > > > + * it is already done by keyring_search() called by > > > + * find_asymmetric_key(). > > > + */ > > > + ret = key_validate(trusted_keyring->key); > > > + if (ret < 0) > > > + return ret; > > > + } > > > + > > > + return verify_pkcs7_signature(data_ptr->data, > > > + bpf_dynptr_get_size(data_ptr) > > > , > > > + sig_ptr->data, > > > + bpf_dynptr_get_size(sig_ptr), > > > > MIssing check for data_ptr->data == NULL before making this call? > > Same > > for sig_ptr. > > Patch 3 requires the dynptrs to be initialized. Isn't enough? > No, it seems even initialized dynptr can be NULL at runtime. Look at both ringbuf_submit_dynptr and ringbuf_discard_dynptr. The verifier won't know after ringbuf_reserve_dynptr whether it set it to NULL or some valid pointer. dynptr_init is basically that stack slot is now STACK_DYNPTR, it says nothing more about the dynptr. As far as testing this goes, you can pass invalid parameters to ringbuf_reserve_dynptr to have it set to NULL, then make sure your helper returns an error at runtime for it. > Thanks > > Roberto >