Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH v8 10/10] integrity: support EC-RDSA signatures for asymmetric_verify | From | Mimi Zohar <> | Date | Wed, 27 Mar 2019 16:21:07 -0400 |
| |
> > diff --git a/security/integrity/digsig_asymmetric.c b/security/integrity/digsig_asymmetric.c > > > index d775e03fbbcc..99080871eb9f 100644 > > > --- a/security/integrity/digsig_asymmetric.c > > > +++ b/security/integrity/digsig_asymmetric.c > > > @@ -104,9 +104,16 @@ int asymmetric_verify(struct key *keyring, const char *sig, > > > > > > memset(&pks, 0, sizeof(pks)); > > > > > > - pks.pkey_algo = "rsa"; > > > pks.hash_algo = hash_algo_name[hdr->hash_algo]; > > > - pks.encoding = "pkcs1"; > > > + if (hdr->hash_algo == HASH_ALGO_STREEBOG_256 || > > > + hdr->hash_algo == HASH_ALGO_STREEBOG_512) { > > > + /* EC-RDSA and Streebog should go together. */ > > > + pks.pkey_algo = "ecrdsa"; > > > + pks.encoding = "raw"; > > > > IMA signatures are stored as xattrs, making them persistent. Support > > for streebog was upstreamed in linux-5.0. This change would break > > existing systems using streebog. As long as this is not yet a concern > > In what sense it would break systems?
For example, if executable files are currently labeled with rsa/streebog signatures, then enforcing file data integrity I assume would break if the kernel uses ecrdsa/streebog.
Mimi
> > Unless kernel crashes or signature is recognized as valid, I think, it should > not be called a break. > > > Reviewed-by: Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com> > > Thanks! > > > > > > + } else { > > > + pks.pkey_algo = "rsa"; > > > + pks.encoding = "pkcs1"; > > > + } > > > pks.digest = (u8 *)data; > > > pks.digest_size = datalen; > > > pks.s = hdr->sig; >
| |