lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2021]   [Jan]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH v9 5/8] IMA: limit critical data measurement based on a label
From
Date


On 2020-12-24 6:29 a.m., Mimi Zohar wrote:
> Hi Tushar,
>
> On Sat, 2020-12-12 at 10:02 -0800, Tushar Sugandhi wrote:
>> System administrators should be able to limit which kernel subsystems
>> they want to measure the critical data for. To enable that, an IMA policy
>> condition to choose specific kernel subsystems is needed. This policy
>> condition would constrain the measurement of the critical data based on
>> a label for the given subsystems.
>
> Restricting which kernel integrity critical data is measured is not
> only of interest to system administrators. Why single them out?
>
system administrators are usually responsible for system
policies/configurations.They own modifications in the config files like
ima-policy. That's why we wanted to address them to begin with. But you
are correct. This is not only of interest to sysadmins. I will make the
description more generic.


> Limiting which critical data is measured is based on a label, making it
> flexible. In your use case scenario, you're grouping the label based
> on kernel subsystem, but is that really necessary? In the broader
> picture, there could be cross subsystem critical data being measured
> based on a single label.
>
> Please think about the broader picture and re-write the patch
> descirption more generically.
>
Makes sense. Will make the patch description more generic.
>>
>> Add a new IMA policy condition - "data_source:=" to the IMA func
>
> What is with "add"? You're "adding support for" or "defining" a new
> policy condition. Remove the single hyphen, as explained in 3/8.
>
> Please replace "data_source" with something more generic (e.g. label).
>
Sounds good. Would you prefer "label" or something else like "data_label"?

In the policy file the "label" looks logical and more generic than
"data_label".
measure func=CRITICAL_DATA label=selinux

For the time being, I will stick with "label", please let me know if you
prefer something else.

Thanks,
Tushar

> thanks,
>
> Mimi
>
>> CRITICAL_DATA to allow measurement of various kernel subsystems. This
>> policy condition would enable the system administrators to restrict the
>> measurement to the labels listed in "data_source:=".
>>
>> Limit the measurement to the labels that are specified in the IMA
>> policy - CRITICAL_DATA+"data_source:=". If "data_sources:=" is not
>> provided with the func CRITICAL_DATA, the data from all the
>> supported kernel subsystems is measured.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Tushar Sugandhi <tusharsu@linux.microsoft.com>

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2021-01-05 21:30    [W:0.394 / U:0.068 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site