lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2022]   [Jun]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v4] x86/kexec: Carry forward IMA measurement log on kexec
On 05/12/22 at 04:25pm, Jonathan McDowell wrote:
> On kexec file load Integrity Measurement Architecture (IMA) subsystem
> may verify the IMA signature of the kernel and initramfs, and measure
> it. The command line parameters passed to the kernel in the kexec call
> may also be measured by IMA. A remote attestation service can verify
> a TPM quote based on the TPM event log, the IMA measurement list, and
> the TPM PCR data. This can be achieved only if the IMA measurement log
> is carried over from the current kernel to the next kernel across
> the kexec call.
>
> powerpc and ARM64 both achieve this using device tree with a
> "linux,ima-kexec-buffer" node. x86 platforms generally don't make use of
> device tree, so use the setup_data mechanism to pass the IMA buffer to
> the new kernel.

The entire looks good to me, other than a minor concern, please see the
inline comment.

Reviewed-by: Baoquan He <bhe@redhat.com>

Hi Coiby,

You can check this patch, see if you can take the same way to solve the
LUKS-encrypted disk issue by passing the key via setup_data.

>
> Signed-off-by: Jonathan McDowell <noodles@fb.com>
> ---
......snip...

> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/kexec-bzimage64.c b/arch/x86/kernel/kexec-bzimage64.c
> index 170d0fd68b1f..54bd4ce5f908 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/kexec-bzimage64.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/kexec-bzimage64.c
> @@ -186,6 +186,33 @@ setup_efi_state(struct boot_params *params, unsigned long params_load_addr,
> }
> #endif /* CONFIG_EFI */
>
> +static void
> +setup_ima_state(const struct kimage *image, struct boot_params *params,
> + unsigned long params_load_addr,
> + unsigned int ima_setup_data_offset)
> +{
> +#ifdef CONFIG_IMA_KEXEC
> + struct setup_data *sd = (void *)params + ima_setup_data_offset;
> + unsigned long setup_data_phys;
> + struct ima_setup_data *ima;
> +
> + if (!image->ima_buffer_size)
> + return;
> +
> + sd->type = SETUP_IMA;
> + sd->len = sizeof(*ima);
> +
> + ima = (void *)sd + sizeof(struct setup_data);
> + ima->addr = image->ima_buffer_addr;
> + ima->size = image->ima_buffer_size;
> +
> + /* Add setup data */
> + setup_data_phys = params_load_addr + ima_setup_data_offset;
> + sd->next = params->hdr.setup_data;
> + params->hdr.setup_data = setup_data_phys;
> +#endif /* CONFIG_IMA_KEXEC */
> +}
> +
> static int
> setup_boot_parameters(struct kimage *image, struct boot_params *params,
> unsigned long params_load_addr,
> @@ -247,6 +274,13 @@ setup_boot_parameters(struct kimage *image, struct boot_params *params,
> setup_efi_state(params, params_load_addr, efi_map_offset, efi_map_sz,
> efi_setup_data_offset);
> #endif
> +
> + /* Setup IMA log buffer state */
> + setup_ima_state(image, params, params_load_addr,
> + efi_setup_data_offset +
> + sizeof(struct setup_data) +
> + sizeof(struct efi_setup_data));

Is it a little better to update efi_setup_data_offset beforehand, or
define a local variable?

efi_setup_data_offset += sizeof(struct setup_data) + sizeof(struct efi_setup_data));
setup_ima_state(image, params, params_load_addr,
efi_setup_data_offset));

No strong opinion. If nobody has concern about it.

> +
> /* Setup EDD info */
> memcpy(params->eddbuf, boot_params.eddbuf,
> EDDMAXNR * sizeof(struct edd_info));

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2022-06-06 06:08    [W:0.443 / U:1.812 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site