Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > linux.kernel > #1353187

Re: [RFC PATCH 11/12] certs: Add a secondary system keyring that can be added to dynamically [ver #2]

From Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Newsgroups linux.kernel
Subject Re: [RFC PATCH 11/12] certs: Add a secondary system keyring that can be added to dynamically [ver #2]
Date 2016-03-08 17:20 +0100
Message-ID <raswy-3bK-5@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References (3 earlier) <r8ZwB-8vJ-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <r8ZwC-8vJ-33@gated-at.bofh.it> <rapIn-1lO-23@gated-at.bofh.it> <rar7s-29e-19@gated-at.bofh.it> <rarTR-2Ho-25@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw


On Tue, 2016-03-08 at 15:32 +0000, David Howells wrote:
> Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> 
> > > The problem boils down to a difficulty in concocting a name that describes a
> > > complex situation that may change depending on the configuration.  I can make
> > > it "restrict_link_by_any_system_trusted" if you'd prefer.
> > > 
> > > That's why I want "system trusted keyrings" to refer to the builtin and the
> > > secondary - *and* an extra UEFI keyring if we grow one of those.  It's a
> > > collection of related keyrings.
> > 
> > Sigh, this is the same discussion we've had for years.
> 
> No, it isn't.

Good!

> > The UEFI keys should not be trusted to validate the certificates being added
> > to the IMA keyring.
> 
> A machine-security (e.g. UEFI) keyring will conceivably live in
> certs/system_keyring.c and only be enabled if CONFIG_SYSTEM_TRUSTED_KEYRINGS=y
> and, say, CONFIG_MACHINE_TRUSTED_KEYRING=y.  I didn't say that IMA necessarily
> has to use it.

Ok.

> What we need to do is define a set of functions allow IMA to get the
> restrictions it wants, depending on configuration.  In the code I currently
> have, I think we have those:
> 
> 	restrict_link_reject

Option 1

> 	restrict_link_by_builtin_trusted

Option 2

> 	restrict_link_by_system_trusted

By renaming the system keyring to builtin, this is where it becomes
unclear what is included by restrict_link_by_system_trusted - builtin
and secondary, or builtin, secondary, and UEFI.

> If you really want, I can add a restrict_link_for_ima in there, but I'd rather
> not if IMA can use whichever of the above three most suits it.  How about:
> 
> 	restrict_link_reject
> 	restrict_link_by_builtin_trusted
> 	restrict_link_by_builtin_or_secondary_trusted

Option 3 - "restrict_link_by_builtin_or_secondary_trusted" is a bit
wordy, but there wouldn't be any confusion.

Mimi

> > Neither should the keys on the secondary keyring, unless specifically IMA
> > Kconfig enabled, be used to validate the certificates being added to the IMA
> > keyring.
> 
> Yes.
> 
> David
> 

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | NextPrevious in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

[RFC PATCH 00/12] KEYS: Restrict additions to 'trusted' keyrings  [ver #2] David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com> - 2016-03-04 16:10 +0100
  [RFC PATCH 04/12] KEYS: Move x509_request_asymmetric_key() to  asymmetric_type.c [ver #2] David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com> - 2016-03-04 16:10 +0100
  [RFC PATCH 12/12] IMA: Use the the system trusted keyrings instead  of .ima_mok [ver #2] David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com> - 2016-03-04 16:10 +0100
    Re: [RFC PATCH 12/12] IMA: Use the the system trusted keyrings  instead of .ima_mok [ver #2] Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2016-03-08 03:30 +0100
      Re: [RFC PATCH 12/12] IMA: Use the the system trusted keyrings instead of .ima_mok [ver #2] David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com> - 2016-03-08 14:10 +0100
        Re: [RFC PATCH 12/12] IMA: Use the the system trusted keyrings  instead of .ima_mok [ver #2] Petko Manolov <petkan@mip-labs.com> - 2016-03-08 15:20 +0100
          Re: [RFC PATCH 12/12] IMA: Use the the system trusted keyrings  instead of .ima_mok [ver #2] Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2016-03-08 15:40 +0100
          Re: [RFC PATCH 12/12] IMA: Use the the system trusted keyrings instead of .ima_mok [ver #2] David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com> - 2016-03-08 15:50 +0100
            Re: [RFC PATCH 12/12] IMA: Use the the system trusted keyrings  instead of .ima_mok [ver #2] Petko Manolov <petkan@mip-labs.com> - 2016-03-08 16:50 +0100
          Re: [RFC PATCH 12/12] IMA: Use the the system trusted keyrings instead of .ima_mok [ver #2] David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com> - 2016-03-08 17:10 +0100
            Re: [RFC PATCH 12/12] IMA: Use the the system trusted keyrings  instead of .ima_mok [ver #2] Petko Manolov <petkan@mip-labs.com> - 2016-03-08 17:40 +0100
              Re: [RFC PATCH 12/12] IMA: Use the the system trusted keyrings  instead of .ima_mok [ver #2] Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2016-03-08 23:10 +0100
        Re: [RFC PATCH 12/12] IMA: Use the the system trusted keyrings  instead of .ima_mok [ver #2] Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2016-03-08 15:20 +0100
  [RFC PATCH 07/12] X.509: Move the trust validation code out to its  own file [ver #2] David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com> - 2016-03-04 16:10 +0100
  [RFC PATCH 11/12] certs: Add a secondary system keyring that can be  added to dynamically [ver #2] David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com> - 2016-03-04 16:10 +0100
    Re: [RFC PATCH 11/12] certs: Add a secondary system keyring that  can be added to dynamically [ver #2] Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2016-03-08 03:10 +0100
      Re: [RFC PATCH 11/12] certs: Add a secondary system keyring that can be added to dynamically [ver #2] David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com> - 2016-03-08 14:20 +0100
        Re: [RFC PATCH 11/12] certs: Add a secondary system keyring that can  be added to dynamically [ver #2] Petko Manolov <petkan@mip-labs.com> - 2016-03-08 15:20 +0100
        Re: [RFC PATCH 11/12] certs: Add a secondary system keyring that  can be added to dynamically [ver #2] Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2016-03-08 15:40 +0100
          Re: [RFC PATCH 11/12] certs: Add a secondary system keyring that can be added to dynamically [ver #2] David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com> - 2016-03-08 15:50 +0100
            Re: [RFC PATCH 11/12] certs: Add a secondary system keyring that  can be added to dynamically [ver #2] Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2016-03-08 16:10 +0100
              Re: [RFC PATCH 11/12] certs: Add a secondary system keyring that can be added to dynamically [ver #2] David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com> - 2016-03-08 16:40 +0100
                Re: [RFC PATCH 11/12] certs: Add a secondary system keyring that  can be added to dynamically [ver #2] Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2016-03-08 17:20 +0100
  [RFC PATCH 05/12] KEYS: Generalise x509_request_asymmetric_key()  [ver #2] David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com> - 2016-03-04 16:10 +0100
  [RFC PATCH 09/12] KEYS: Move the point of trust determination to  __key_link() [ver #2] David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com> - 2016-03-04 16:10 +0100
  [RFC PATCH 02/12] PKCS#7: Make trust determination dependent on  contents of trust keyring [ver #2] David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com> - 2016-03-04 16:10 +0100
  [RFC PATCH 06/12] X.509: Use verify_signature() if we have a struct  key * to use [ver #2] David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com> - 2016-03-04 16:10 +0100
  [RFC PATCH 10/12] KEYS: Remove KEY_FLAG_TRUSTED and  KEY_ALLOC_TRUSTED [ver #2] David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com> - 2016-03-04 16:10 +0100

csiph-web