[PATCH bpf-next v3 1/3] ima: Implement ima_inode_hash

[Daniel Borkmann]

On 11/25/20 1:04 PM, KP Singh wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 24, 2020 at 6:35 PM Yonghong Song <yhs at fb.com> wrote:
>> On 11/24/20 7:12 AM, KP Singh wrote:
>>> From: KP Singh <kpsingh at google.com>
>>>
>>> This is in preparation to add a helper for BPF LSM programs to use
>>> IMA hashes when attached to LSM hooks. There are LSM hooks like
>>> inode_unlink which do not have a struct file * argument and cannot
>>> use the existing ima_file_hash API.
>>>
>>> An inode based API is, therefore, useful in LSM based detections like an
>>> executable trying to delete itself which rely on the inode_unlink LSM
>>> hook.
>>>
>>> Moreover, the ima_file_hash function does nothing with the struct file
>>> pointer apart from calling file_inode on it and converting it to an
>>> inode.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: KP Singh <kpsingh at google.com>
>>
>> There is no change for this patch compared to previous version,
>> so you can carry my Ack.
>>
>> Acked-by: Yonghong Song <yhs at fb.com>
> 
> I am guessing:
> 
> *  We need an Ack from Mimi/James.

Yes.

> * As regards to which tree, I guess bpf-next would be better since the
> BPF helper and the selftest depends on it

Yep, bpf-next is my preference as otherwise we're running into unnecessary
merge conflicts.

Thanks,
Daniel