On Mon, 2020-02-10 at 11:04 +0100, Roberto Sassu wrote: > @@ -219,6 +214,8 @@ int ima_restore_measurement_entry(struct ima_template_entry *entry) > > int __init ima_init_digests(void) > { > + u16 digest_size; > + u16 crypto_id; > int i; > > if (!ima_tpm_chip) > @@ -229,8 +226,17 @@ int __init ima_init_digests(void) > if (!digests) > return -ENOMEM; > > - for (i = 0; i < ima_tpm_chip->nr_allocated_banks; i++) > + for (i = 0; i < ima_tpm_chip->nr_allocated_banks; i++) { > digests[i].alg_id = ima_tpm_chip->allocated_banks[i].alg_id; > + digest_size = ima_tpm_chip->allocated_banks[i].digest_size; > + crypto_id = ima_tpm_chip->allocated_banks[i].crypto_id; > + > + /* for unmapped TPM algorithms digest is still a padded SHA1 */ > + if (crypto_id == HASH_ALGO__LAST) > + digest_size = SHA1_DIGEST_SIZE; > + > + memset(digests[i].digest, 0xff, digest_size); Shouldn't the memset here be of the actual digest size even for unmapped TPM algorithms. > + } > > return 0; > }