Hi,
On 24-04-18 18:07, Mimi Zohar wrote:
On Tue, 2018-04-24 at 17:09 +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:
Hi,
On 23-04-18 23:11, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
Hans, please see use of READING_FIRMWARE_PREALLOC_BUFFER, we'll need a new ID
and security for this type of request so IMA can reject it if the policy is
configured for it.
Hmm, interesting, actually it seems like the whole existence
of READING_FIRMWARE_PREALLOC_BUFFER is a mistake, the IMA
framework really does not care if we are loading the firmware
into memory allocated by the firmware-loader code, or into
memory allocated by the device-driver requesting the firmware.
As such the current IMA code (from v4.17-rc2) actually does
not handle READING_FIRMWARE_PREALLOC_BUFFER at all,
Right, it doesn't yet address READING_FIRMWARE_PREALLOC_BUFFER, but
should.
Depending on whether the device requesting the firmware has access to
the DMA memory, before the signature verification, will determine how
IMA-appraisal addresses READING_FIRMWARE_PREALLOC_BUFFER.
Ah I see. So this probably means that the IMA integration for
my EFI embedded firmware code should also pass READING_FIRMWARE or
READING_FIRMWARE_PREALLOC_BUFFER depending on if a pre-allocated
buffer is used.
Hmm, the security_kernel_post_read_file() call in
drivers/base/firmware_loader/fallback.c
Unconditionally passes READING_FIRMWARE, it should probably check
fw_priv->is_paged_buf and base the id to pass on that.
And yes it is possible AFAICT for the firmware_request_into_buf()
method to fallback to the userspace helper, this can happen if the
fw_fallback_config.force_sysfs_fallback flag is set.
Regards,
Hans
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-efi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
