lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2022]   [Mar]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
From
Subject[PATCH v1 1/1] certs: Explain the rational to call panic()
Date
From: Mickaël Salaün <mic@linux.microsoft.com>

The blacklist_init() function calls panic() for memory allocation
errors. This change documents the reason why we don't return -ENODEV.

Suggested-by: Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore.com> [1]
Requested-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@kernel.org> [1]
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/YjeW2r6Wv55Du0bJ@iki.fi [1]
Signed-off-by: Mickaël Salaün <mic@linux.microsoft.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220321174548.510516-2-mic@digikod.net
---
certs/blacklist.c | 8 ++++++++
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)

diff --git a/certs/blacklist.c b/certs/blacklist.c
index 486ce0dd8e9c..ac26bcf9b9a5 100644
--- a/certs/blacklist.c
+++ b/certs/blacklist.c
@@ -307,6 +307,14 @@ static int restrict_link_for_blacklist(struct key *dest_keyring,

/*
* Initialise the blacklist
+ *
+ * The blacklist_init() function is registered as an initcall via
+ * device_initcall(). As a result the functionality doesn't load and the
+ * kernel continues on executing. While cleanly returning -ENODEV could be
+ * acceptable for some non-critical kernel parts, if the blacklist keyring
+ * fails to load it defeats the certificate/key based deny list for signed
+ * modules. If a critical piece of security functionality that users expect to
+ * be present fails to initialize, panic()ing is likely the right thing to do.
*/
static int __init blacklist_init(void)
{
--
2.35.1
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2022-03-21 18:47    [W:0.049 / U:0.016 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site