[RFC PATCH 0/2] ima: uncompressed module appraisal support
Mimi Zohar
zohar at linux.ibm.com
Mon Feb 10 20:33:49 UTC 2020
On Mon, 2020-02-10 at 12:24 -0700, Eric Snowberg wrote:
> > On Feb 10, 2020, at 10:09 AM, Mimi Zohar <zohar at linux.ibm.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Ok, understood, “modsig” refers to strictly kernel module appended signatures
> >> without regard to the keyring that verifies it. Since there are inconsistencies
> >> here, would you consider something like my first patch? It will verify an
> >> uncompressed kernel module containing an appended signature when the public key
> >> is contained within the kernel keyring instead of the ima keyring. Why force a
> >> person to add the same keys into the ima keyring for validation? Especially when
> >> the kernel keyring is now used to verify appended signatures in the compressed
> >> modules.
> >
> > Different use case scenarios have different requirements. Suppose for
> > example that the group creating the kernel image is not the same as
> > using it. The group using the kernel image could sign all files,
> > including kernel modules (imasig), with their own private key. Only
> > files that they signed would be permitted. Your proposal would break
> > the current expectations, allowing kernel modules signed by someone
> > else to be loaded.
> >
>
> All the end user needs to do is compress any module created by the group that built
> the original kernel image to work around the scenario above. Then the appended
> signature in the compressed module will be verified by the kernel keyring. Does
> this mean there is a security problem that should be fixed, if this is a concern?
Again, the issue isn't compressed/uncompressed kernel modules, but the
syscall used to load the kernel module. IMA can prevent using the the
init_module syscall. Refer to the ima_load_data() LOADING_MODULE
case.
Mimi
More information about the Linux-security-module-archive
mailing list