Re: [PATCH v5 1/4] certs: Add EFI_CERT_X509_GUID support for dbx entries

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 




On 1/22/21 1:10 PM, Eric Snowberg wrote:
This fixes CVE-2020-26541.

The Secure Boot Forbidden Signature Database, dbx, contains a list of now
revoked signatures and keys previously approved to boot with UEFI Secure
Boot enabled.  The dbx is capable of containing any number of
EFI_CERT_X509_SHA256_GUID, EFI_CERT_SHA256_GUID, and EFI_CERT_X509_GUID
entries.

Currently when EFI_CERT_X509_GUID are contained in the dbx, the entries are
skipped.

Add support for EFI_CERT_X509_GUID dbx entries. When a EFI_CERT_X509_GUID
is found, it is added as an asymmetrical key to the .blacklist keyring.
Anytime the .platform keyring is used, the keys in the .blacklist keyring
are referenced, if a matching key is found, the key will be rejected.

Signed-off-by: Eric Snowberg <eric.snowberg@xxxxxxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: David Howells <dhowells@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
v5: Function name changes done by David Howells
---
  certs/blacklist.c                             | 32 +++++++++++++++++++
  certs/blacklist.h                             | 12 +++++++
  certs/system_keyring.c                        |  6 ++++
  include/keys/system_keyring.h                 | 11 +++++++
  .../platform_certs/keyring_handler.c          | 11 +++++++
  5 files changed, 72 insertions(+)

diff --git a/certs/blacklist.c b/certs/blacklist.c
index 6514f9ebc943..a7f021878a4b 100644
--- a/certs/blacklist.c
+++ b/certs/blacklist.c
@@ -100,6 +100,38 @@ int mark_hash_blacklisted(const char *hash)
  	return 0;
  }

+int add_key_to_revocation_list(const char *data, size_t size)
+{
+	key_ref_t key;
+
+	key = key_create_or_update(make_key_ref(blacklist_keyring, true),
+				   "asymmetric",
+				   NULL,
+				   data,
+				   size,
+				   ((KEY_POS_ALL & ~KEY_POS_SETATTR) | KEY_USR_VIEW),
+				   KEY_ALLOC_NOT_IN_QUOTA | KEY_ALLOC_BUILT_IN);
+
+	if (IS_ERR(key)) {
+		pr_err("Problem with revocation key (%ld)\n", PTR_ERR(key));
+		return PTR_ERR(key);
+	}
+
+	return 0;
+}
+
+int is_key_on_revocation_list(struct pkcs7_message *pkcs7)
+{
+	int ret;
+
+	ret = validate_trust(pkcs7, blacklist_keyring);
+
+	if (ret == 0)
+		return -EKEYREJECTED;
+
+	return -ENOKEY;
+}
+
  /**
   * is_hash_blacklisted - Determine if a hash is blacklisted
   * @hash: The hash to be checked as a binary blob
diff --git a/certs/blacklist.h b/certs/blacklist.h
index 1efd6fa0dc60..420bb7c86e07 100644
--- a/certs/blacklist.h
+++ b/certs/blacklist.h
@@ -1,3 +1,15 @@
  #include <linux/kernel.h>
+#include <linux/errno.h>
+#include <crypto/pkcs7.h>

  extern const char __initconst *const blacklist_hashes[];
+
+#ifdef CONFIG_INTEGRITY_PLATFORM_KEYRING
+#define validate_trust pkcs7_validate_trust
+#else
+static inline int validate_trust(struct pkcs7_message *pkcs7,
+				 struct key *trust_keyring)
+{
+	return -ENOKEY;
+}
+#endif
diff --git a/certs/system_keyring.c b/certs/system_keyring.c
index 798291177186..cc165b359ea3 100644
--- a/certs/system_keyring.c
+++ b/certs/system_keyring.c
@@ -241,6 +241,12 @@ int verify_pkcs7_message_sig(const void *data, size_t len,
  			pr_devel("PKCS#7 platform keyring is not available\n");
  			goto error;
  		}
+
+		ret = is_key_on_revocation_list(pkcs7);
+		if (ret != -ENOKEY) {
+			pr_devel("PKCS#7 platform key is on revocation list\n");
+			goto error;
+		}
  	}
  	ret = pkcs7_validate_trust(pkcs7, trusted_keys);
  	if (ret < 0) {
diff --git a/include/keys/system_keyring.h b/include/keys/system_keyring.h
index fb8b07daa9d1..61f98739e8b1 100644
--- a/include/keys/system_keyring.h
+++ b/include/keys/system_keyring.h
@@ -31,11 +31,14 @@ extern int restrict_link_by_builtin_and_secondary_trusted(
  #define restrict_link_by_builtin_and_secondary_trusted restrict_link_by_builtin_trusted
  #endif

+extern struct pkcs7_message *pkcs7;
  #ifdef CONFIG_SYSTEM_BLACKLIST_KEYRING
  extern int mark_hash_blacklisted(const char *hash);
+extern int add_key_to_revocation_list(const char *data, size_t size);
  extern int is_hash_blacklisted(const u8 *hash, size_t hash_len,
  			       const char *type);
  extern int is_binary_blacklisted(const u8 *hash, size_t hash_len);
+extern int is_key_on_revocation_list(struct pkcs7_message *pkcs7);
  #else
  static inline int is_hash_blacklisted(const u8 *hash, size_t hash_len,
  				      const char *type)
@@ -47,6 +50,14 @@ static inline int is_binary_blacklisted(const u8 *hash, size_t hash_len)
  {
  	return 0;
  }
+static inline int add_key_to_revocation_list(const char *data, size_t size)
+{
+	return 0;
+}
+static inline int is_key_on_revocation_list(struct pkcs7_message *pkcs7)
+{
+	return -ENOKEY;
+}
  #endif

  #ifdef CONFIG_IMA_BLACKLIST_KEYRING
diff --git a/security/integrity/platform_certs/keyring_handler.c b/security/integrity/platform_certs/keyring_handler.c
index c5ba695c10e3..5604bd57c990 100644
--- a/security/integrity/platform_certs/keyring_handler.c
+++ b/security/integrity/platform_certs/keyring_handler.c
@@ -55,6 +55,15 @@ static __init void uefi_blacklist_binary(const char *source,
  	uefi_blacklist_hash(source, data, len, "bin:", 4);
  }

+/*
+ * Add an X509 cert to the revocation list.
+ */
+static __init void uefi_revocation_list_x509(const char *source,
+					     const void *data, size_t len)
+{
+	add_key_to_revocation_list(data, len);
+}

In keeping the naming convention with other functions that blacklist hashes, why can't we call these functions:

* uefi_revocation_list_x509() -> uefi_blacklist_x509_cert()
* add_key_to_revocation_list() -> uefi_blacklist_cert()
* is_key_on_revocation_list() -> is_cert_blacklisted()

Thanks & Regards,

     - Nayna




[Index of Archives]     [Linux&nblp;USB Development]     [Linux Media]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Secrets]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux