[KEXEC_KERNEL_CHECK] [KEXEC_INITRAMFS_CHECK]
[KEXEC_CMDLINE] [KEY_CHECK] [CRITICAL_DATA]
+ [SETXATTR_CHECK]
mask:= [[^]MAY_READ] [[^]MAY_WRITE] [[^]MAY_APPEND]
[[^]MAY_EXEC]
fsmagic:= hex value
@@ -138,3 +139,9 @@ Description:
keys added to .builtin_trusted_keys or .ima keyring:
measure func=KEY_CHECK keyrings=.builtin_trusted_keys|.ima
+
+ Example of the special SETXATTR_CHECK appraise rule, that
+ restricts the hash algorithms allowed when writing to the
+ security.ima xattr of a file:
+
+ appraise func=SETXATTR_CHECK appraise_hash=sha256,sha384,sha512
diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima.h b/security/integrity/ima/ima.h
index 8db0238a0fd6..7f2aa875fd72 100644
--- a/security/integrity/ima/ima.h
+++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima.h
@@ -46,6 +46,9 @@ enum tpm_pcrs { TPM_PCR0 = 0, TPM_PCR8 = 8, TPM_PCR10 = 10 };
/* current content of the policy */
extern int ima_policy_flag;
+/* bitset of digests algorithms allowed in the setxattr hook */
+extern atomic_t ima_setxattr_allowed_hash_algorithms;
+
/* set during initialization */
extern int ima_hash_algo __ro_after_init;
extern int ima_sha1_idx __ro_after_init;
@@ -198,6 +201,7 @@ static inline unsigned int ima_hash_key(u8 *digest)
hook(KEXEC_CMDLINE, kexec_cmdline) \
hook(KEY_CHECK, key) \
hook(CRITICAL_DATA, critical_data) \
+ hook(SETXATTR_CHECK, setxattr_check) \
hook(MAX_CHECK, none)
#define __ima_hook_enumify(ENUM, str) ENUM,
@@ -288,7 +292,7 @@ int ima_match_policy(struct user_namespace *mnt_userns, struct inode *inode,
const char *func_data, unsigned int *allowed_hashes);
void ima_init_policy(void);
void ima_update_policy(void);
-void ima_update_policy_flag(void);
+void ima_update_policy_flags(void);
ssize_t ima_parse_add_rule(char *);
void ima_delete_rules(void);
int ima_check_policy(void);
diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_appraise.c b/security/integrity/ima/ima_appraise.c
index 9aa0334b8e54..4949aabce36c 100644
--- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_appraise.c
+++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_appraise.c
@@ -597,12 +597,32 @@ static int validate_hash_algo(struct dentry *dentry,
int result = 0;
char *path = NULL, *pathbuf = NULL;
enum hash_algo xattr_hash_algo;
+ const char *errmsg = "unavailable-hash-algorithm";
+ unsigned int allowed_hashes;
xattr_hash_algo = ima_get_hash_algo(xattr_value, xattr_value_len);
- if (likely(xattr_hash_algo == ima_hash_algo ||
- crypto_has_alg(hash_algo_name[xattr_hash_algo], 0, 0)))
- return result;
+ allowed_hashes = atomic_read(&ima_setxattr_allowed_hash_algorithms);
+
+ if (allowed_hashes) {
+ /* success if the algorithm is allowed in the ima policy */
+ if (allowed_hashes & (1U << xattr_hash_algo))
+ return result;
+
+ /*
+ * We use a different audit message when the hash algorithm
+ * is denied by a policy rule, instead of not being built
+ * in the kernel image
+ */
+ errmsg = "denied-hash-algorithm";
+ } else {
+ if (likely(xattr_hash_algo == ima_hash_algo))
+ return result;
+
+ /* allow any xattr using an algorithm built in the kernel */
+ if (crypto_has_alg(hash_algo_name[xattr_hash_algo], 0, 0))
+ return result;
+ }
result = -EACCES;
@@ -613,8 +633,7 @@ static int validate_hash_algo(struct dentry *dentry,
path = dentry_path(dentry, pathbuf, PATH_MAX);
integrity_audit_msg(AUDIT_INTEGRITY_DATA, d_inode(dentry), path,
- "collect_data", "unavailable-hash-algorithm",
- result, 0);
+ "collect_data", errmsg, result, 0);
kfree(pathbuf);
diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c b/security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c
index 205138e7016d..f6389f0ff81b 100644
--- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c
+++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c
@@ -1052,7 +1052,7 @@ static int __init init_ima(void)
pr_warn("Couldn't register LSM notifier, error %d\n", error);
if (!error)
- ima_update_policy_flag();
+ ima_update_policy_flags();
return error;
}
diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c b/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c
index 831ce0c690ec..c83f7c199610 100644
--- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c
+++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c
@@ -53,6 +53,8 @@ int ima_policy_flag;
static int temp_ima_appraise;
static int build_ima_appraise __ro_after_init;
+atomic_t ima_setxattr_allowed_hash_algorithms;
+
#define MAX_LSM_RULES 6
enum lsm_rule_types { LSM_OBJ_USER, LSM_OBJ_ROLE, LSM_OBJ_TYPE,
LSM_SUBJ_USER, LSM_SUBJ_ROLE, LSM_SUBJ_TYPE
@@ -720,24 +722,57 @@ int ima_match_policy(struct user_namespace *mnt_userns, struct inode *inode,
return action;
}
-/*
- * Initialize the ima_policy_flag variable based on the currently
- * loaded policy. Based on this flag, the decision to short circuit
- * out of a function or not call the function in the first place
- * can be made earlier.
+/**
+ * ima_update_policy_flags() - Update global IMA variables
+ *
+ * Update ima_policy_flag and ima_setxattr_allowed_hash_algorithms
+ * based on the currently loaded policy.
+ *
+ * With ima_policy_flag, the decision to short circuit out of a function
+ * or not call the function in the first place can be made earlier.
+ *
+ * With ima_setxattr_allowed_hash_algorithms, the policy can restrict the
+ * set of hash algorithms accepted when updating the security.ima xattr of
+ * a file.
+ *
+ * Context: called after a policy update and at system initialization.
*/
-void ima_update_policy_flag(void)
+void ima_update_policy_flags(void)
{
struct ima_rule_entry *entry;
+ int new_policy_flag = 0;
+ rcu_read_lock();
list_for_each_entry(entry, ima_rules, list) {
+ /*
+ * SETXATTR_CHECK rules do not implement a full policy check
+ * because rule checking would probably have an important
+ * performance impact on setxattr(). As a consequence, only one
+ * SETXATTR_CHECK can be active at a given time.
+ * Because we want to preserve that property, we set out to use
+ * atomic_cmpxchg. Either:
+ * - the atomic was non-zero: a setxattr hash policy is
+ * already enforced, we do nothing
+ * - the atomic was zero: no setxattr policy was set, enable
+ * the setxattr hash policy
+ */
+ if (entry->func == SETXATTR_CHECK) {
+ atomic_cmpxchg(&ima_setxattr_allowed_hash_algorithms,
+ 0, entry->allowed_hashes);
+ /* SETXATTR_CHECK doesn't impact ima_policy_flag */
+ continue;
+ }
+
if (entry->action & IMA_DO_MASK)
- ima_policy_flag |= entry->action;
+ new_policy_flag |= entry->action;
}
+ rcu_read_unlock();
ima_appraise |= (build_ima_appraise | temp_ima_appraise);
if (!ima_appraise)
- ima_policy_flag &= ~IMA_APPRAISE;
+ new_policy_flag &= ~IMA_APPRAISE;
+
+ ima_policy_flag = new_policy_flag;
}
static int ima_appraise_flag(enum ima_hooks func)
@@ -903,7 +938,9 @@ void __init ima_init_policy(void)
ARRAY_SIZE(critical_data_rules),
IMA_DEFAULT_POLICY);
- ima_update_policy_flag();
+ atomic_set(&ima_setxattr_allowed_hash_algorithms, 0);
+
+ ima_update_policy_flags();
}
/* Make sure we have a valid policy, at least containing some rules. */
@@ -943,7 +980,7 @@ void ima_update_policy(void)
*/
kfree(arch_policy_entry);
}
- ima_update_policy_flag();
+ ima_update_policy_flags();
/* Custom IMA policy has been loaded */
ima_process_queued_keys();
@@ -1176,6 +1213,23 @@ static bool ima_validate_rule(struct ima_rule_entry *entry)
if (ima_rule_contains_lsm_cond(entry))
return false;
+ break;
+ case SETXATTR_CHECK:
+ /* any action other than APPRAISE is unsupported */
+ if (entry->action != APPRAISE)
+ return false;
+
+ /* SETXATTR_CHECK requires an appraise_hash parameter */
+ if (!(entry->flags & IMA_VALIDATE_HASH))
+ return false;
+
+ /*
+ * full policies are not supported, they would have too
+ * much of a performance impact
+ */
+ if (entry->flags & ~(IMA_FUNC | IMA_VALIDATE_HASH))
+ return false;
+
break;
default:
return false;
@@ -1332,6 +1386,8 @@ static int ima_parse_rule(char *rule, struct ima_rule_entry *entry)
entry->func = KEY_CHECK;
else if (strcmp(args[0].from, "CRITICAL_DATA") == 0)
entry->func = CRITICAL_DATA;
+ else if (strcmp(args[0].from, "SETXATTR_CHECK") == 0)
+ entry->func = SETXATTR_CHECK;
else
result = -EINVAL;
if (!result)
