On 05/19/22 at 07:56am, Mimi Zohar wrote:
> [Cc'ing Jarkko, linux-integrity]
>
> On Thu, 2022-05-19 at 08:39 +0800, Baoquan He wrote:
> > On 05/18/22 at 01:29pm, Heiko Carstens wrote:
> > > On Thu, May 12, 2022 at 03:01:23PM +0800, Coiby Xu wrote:
> > > > From: Michal Suchanek <msuchanek@xxxxxxx>
> > > >
> > > > commit e23a8020ce4e ("s390/kexec_file: Signature verification prototype")
> > > > adds support for KEXEC_SIG verification with keys from platform keyring
> > > > but the built-in keys and secondary keyring are not used.
> > > >
> > > > Add support for the built-in keys and secondary keyring as x86 does.
> > > >
> > > > Fixes: e23a8020ce4e ("s390/kexec_file: Signature verification prototype")
> > > > Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > Cc: Philipp Rudo <prudo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > Cc: kexec@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > Cc: keyrings@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > Cc: linux-security-module@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > Signed-off-by: Michal Suchanek <msuchanek@xxxxxxx>
> > > > Reviewed-by: "Lee, Chun-Yi" <jlee@xxxxxxxx>
> > > > Acked-by: Baoquan He <bhe@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Coiby Xu <coxu@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > ---
> > > > arch/s390/kernel/machine_kexec_file.c | 18 +++++++++++++-----
> > > > 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > As far as I can tell this doesn't have any dependency to the other
> > > patches in this series, so should I pick this up for the s390 tree, or
> > > how will this go upstream?
> >
> > Thanks, Heiko.
> >
> > I want to ask Mimi if this can be taken into KEYS-ENCRYPTED tree.
> > Otherwise I will ask Andrew to help pick this whole series.
> >
> > Surely, this patch 4 can be taken into s390 seperately since it's
> > independent, both looks good.
>
> KEYS-ENCRYTPED is a type of key, unrelated to using the .platform,
> .builtin, .machine, or .secondary keyrings. One of the main reasons
> for this patch set is to use the new ".machine" keyring, which, if
> enabled, is linked to the "secondary" keyring. However, the only
> reference to the ".machine" keyring is in the cover letter, not any of
> the patch descriptions. Since this is the basis for the system's
> integrity, this seems like a pretty big omission.
>
> From patch 2/4:
> "The code in bzImage64_verify_sig makes use of system keyrings
> including
> .buitin_trusted_keys, .secondary_trusted_keys and .platform keyring to
> verify signed kernel image as PE file..."
>
> From patch 3/4:
> "This patch allows to verify arm64 kernel image signature using not
> only
> .builtin_trusted_keys but also .platform and .secondary_trusted_keys
> keyring."
>
> From patch 4/4:
> "... with keys from platform keyring but the built-in keys and
> secondary keyring are not used."
>
> This patch set could probably go through KEYS/KEYRINGS_INTEGRITY, but
> it's kind of late to be asking. Has it been in linux-next? Should I
> assume this patch set has been fully tested or can we get some "tags"?
Right, it should be KEYS/KEYRINGS_INTEGRITY related, I made mistaken.
Now it got two ACKs from Michal and me. Michal met the same issue on
arm64 and posted another series of patches, finally Coiby integrated
Michal's patch and his to make this patchset. That would be great if
this can get reviewing from experts on key/keyring. Surely, Coiby need
update the patch log to add the '.machine' keyring into patch logs as
you pointed out.
IIRC, Coiby has tested it on x86_64/arm64, not sure if he took test on
s390. No, this hasn't been in linux-next.
