Re: [PATCH 0/4] ima: support fs-verity signatures stored as

[Mimi Zohar]

On Mon, 2021-11-29 at 18:36 -0800, Eric Biggers wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 29, 2021 at 12:00:53PM -0500, Mimi Zohar wrote:
> > Support for fs-verity file digests in IMA was discussed from the beginning,
> > prior to fs-verity being upstreamed[1,2].  This patch set adds signature
> > verification support based on the fs-verity file digest.  Both the
> > file digest and the signature must be included in the IMA measurement list
> > in order to disambiguate the type of file digest.
> > 
> > [1] https://events19.linuxfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/fs-verify_Mike-Halcrow_Eric-Biggers.pdf
> > [2] Documentation/filesystems/fsverity.rst
> > 
> > Mimi Zohar (4):
> >   fs-verity: define a function to return the integrity protected file
> >     digest
> >   ima: define a new signature type named IMA_VERITY_DIGSIG
> >   ima: limit including fs-verity's file digest in measurement list
> >   ima: support fs-verity file digest based signatures
> > 
> >  fs/verity/fsverity_private.h              |  6 ---
> >  fs/verity/measure.c                       | 49 +++++++++++++++++++++++
> >  include/linux/fsverity.h                  | 17 ++++++++
> >  security/integrity/ima/ima.h              |  3 +-
> >  security/integrity/ima/ima_api.c          | 23 ++++++++++-
> >  security/integrity/ima/ima_appraise.c     |  9 ++++-
> >  security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c         |  7 +++-
> >  security/integrity/ima/ima_template_lib.c |  3 +-
> >  security/integrity/integrity.h            |  1 +
> >  9 files changed, 107 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
> 
> I left some comments, but this generally looks like the right approach.
> However, I'm not an expert in IMA, so it's hard for me to review the IMA parts.

Thank you for the quick review!

> 
> Can you add documentation for this feature?

Yes, of course.  Originally I assumed the fs-verity support would be a
lot more complicated, but to my pleasant surprise by limiting the IMA
fsverity support to just signatures and requiring the file signature be
included in the IMA measurement list, it's a lot simpler than expected.
As there aren't any IMA policy changes, I'm just thinking about where
to document it.

thanks,

Mimi