[PATCH v2 0/6] bpf-lsm: Extend interoperability with IMA

[Mimi Zohar]

On Sat, 2022-02-26 at 09:07 +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 25, 2022 at 02:11:04PM -0500, Mimi Zohar wrote:
> > On Fri, 2022-02-25 at 08:41 +0000, Roberto Sassu wrote:
> > > > From: Mimi Zohar [mailto:zohar at linux.ibm.com]
> > > > Sent: Friday, February 25, 2022 1:22 AM
> > > > Hi Roberto,
> > > > 
> > > > On Tue, 2022-02-15 at 13:40 +0100, Roberto Sassu wrote:
> > > > > Extend the interoperability with IMA, to give wider flexibility for the
> > > > > implementation of integrity-focused LSMs based on eBPF.
> > > > 
> > > > I've previously requested adding eBPF module measurements and signature
> > > > verification support in IMA.  There seemed to be some interest, but
> > > > nothing has been posted.
> > > 
> > > Hi Mimi
> > > 
> > > for my use case, DIGLIM eBPF, IMA integrity verification is
> > > needed until the binary carrying the eBPF program is executed
> > > as the init process. I've been thinking to use an appended
> > > signature to overcome the limitation of lack of xattrs in the
> > > initial ram disk.
> > 
> > I would still like to see xattrs supported in the initial ram disk. 
> > Assuming you're still interested in pursuing it, someone would need to
> > review and upstream it.  Greg?
> 
> Me?  How about the filesystem maintainers and developers?  :)
> 
> There's a reason we never added xattrs support to ram disks, but I can't
> remember why...

CPIO 'newc' format doesn't support xattrs.

thanks,

Mimi