On Thu, Apr 6, 2023 at 10:20 AM Stefan Berger <stefanb@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 4/6/23 10:05, Paul Moore wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 6, 2023 at 6:26 AM Christian Brauner <brauner@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> On Wed, Apr 05, 2023 at 01:14:49PM -0400, Stefan Berger wrote: > >>> Overlayfs fails to notify IMA / EVM about file content modifications > >>> and therefore IMA-appraised files may execute even though their file > >>> signature does not validate against the changed hash of the file > >>> anymore. To resolve this issue, add a call to integrity_notify_change() > >>> to the ovl_release() function to notify the integrity subsystem about > >>> file changes. The set flag triggers the re-evaluation of the file by > >>> IMA / EVM once the file is accessed again. > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Stefan Berger <stefanb@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >>> --- > >>> fs/overlayfs/file.c | 4 ++++ > >>> include/linux/integrity.h | 6 ++++++ > >>> security/integrity/iint.c | 13 +++++++++++++ > >>> 3 files changed, 23 insertions(+) > >>> > >>> diff --git a/fs/overlayfs/file.c b/fs/overlayfs/file.c > >>> index 6011f955436b..19b8f4bcc18c 100644 > >>> --- a/fs/overlayfs/file.c > >>> +++ b/fs/overlayfs/file.c > >>> @@ -13,6 +13,7 @@ > >>> #include <linux/security.h> > >>> #include <linux/mm.h> > >>> #include <linux/fs.h> > >>> +#include <linux/integrity.h> > >>> #include "overlayfs.h" > >>> > >>> struct ovl_aio_req { > >>> @@ -169,6 +170,9 @@ static int ovl_open(struct inode *inode, struct file *file) > >>> > >>> static int ovl_release(struct inode *inode, struct file *file) > >>> { > >>> + if (file->f_flags & O_ACCMODE) > >>> + integrity_notify_change(inode); > >>> + > >>> fput(file->private_data); > >>> > >>> return 0; > >>> diff --git a/include/linux/integrity.h b/include/linux/integrity.h > >>> index 2ea0f2f65ab6..cefdeccc1619 100644 > >>> --- a/include/linux/integrity.h > >>> +++ b/include/linux/integrity.h > >>> @@ -23,6 +23,7 @@ enum integrity_status { > >>> #ifdef CONFIG_INTEGRITY > >>> extern struct integrity_iint_cache *integrity_inode_get(struct inode *inode); > >>> extern void integrity_inode_free(struct inode *inode); > >>> +extern void integrity_notify_change(struct inode *inode); > >> > >> I thought we concluded that ima is going to move into the security hook > >> infrastructure so it seems this should be a proper LSM hook? > > > > We are working towards migrating IMA/EVM to the LSM layer, but there > > are a few things we need to fix/update/remove first; if anyone is > > curious, you can join the LSM list as we've been discussing some of > > these changes this week. Bug fixes like this should probably remain > > as IMA/EVM calls for the time being, with the understanding that they > > will migrate over with the rest of IMA/EVM. > > > > That said, we should give Mimi a chance to review this patch as it is > > possible there is a different/better approach. A bit of patience may > > be required as I know Mimi is very busy at the moment. > > There may be a better approach actually by increasing the inode's i_version, > which then should trigger the appropriate path in ima_check_last_writer(). I'm not the VFS/inode expert here, but I thought the inode's i_version field was only supposed to be bumped when the inode metadata changed, not necessarily the file contents, right? That said, overlayfs is a bit different so maybe that's okay, but I think we would need to hear from the VFS folks if this is acceptable. -- paul-moore.com