From: Janne Karhunen janne.karhunen@gmail.com

[ Upstream commit b169424551930a9325f700f502802f4d515194e5 ]

This patch is backported to resolve the issue of IMA ignoreing LSM part of an LSM based rule. As the LSM notifier chain was an atomic notifier chain, we'll not be able to call synchronize_rcu() within our notifier handling function.

Original patch message is as follows:

Don't do lazy policy updates while running the rule matching, run the updates as they happen.

Depends on commit f242064c5df3 ("LSM: switch to blocking policy update notifiers")

Signed-off-by: Janne Karhunen janne.karhunen@gmail.com Signed-off-by: Mimi Zohar zohar@linux.ibm.com Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org #4.19.y Signed-off-by: GUO Zihua guozihua@huawei.com --- security/integrity/ima/ima.h | 2 + security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c | 8 ++ security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c | 115 +++++++++++++++++++++++----- 3 files changed, 105 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)

diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima.h b/security/integrity/ima/ima.h index e2916b115b93..dc564ed9a790 100644 --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima.h +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima.h @@ -154,6 +154,8 @@ int ima_measurements_show(struct seq_file *m, void *v); unsigned long ima_get_binary_runtime_size(void); int ima_init_template(void); void ima_init_template_list(void); +int ima_lsm_policy_change(struct notifier_block *nb, unsigned long event, + void *lsm_data);

/* * used to protect h_table and sha_table diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c b/security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c index 2d31921fbda4..f461b3e2de00 100644 --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_main.c @@ -41,6 +41,10 @@ int ima_appraise; int ima_hash_algo = HASH_ALGO_SHA1; static int hash_setup_done;

+static struct notifier_block ima_lsm_policy_notifier = { + .notifier_call = ima_lsm_policy_change, +}; + static int __init hash_setup(char *str) { struct ima_template_desc *template_desc = ima_template_desc_current(); @@ -553,6 +557,10 @@ static int __init init_ima(void) error = ima_init(); }

+ error = register_lsm_notifier(&ima_lsm_policy_notifier); + if (error) + pr_warn("Couldn't register LSM notifier, error %d\n", error); + if (!error) ima_update_policy_flag();

diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c b/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c index b2dadff3626b..1e0251e9510a 100644 --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c @@ -256,31 +256,112 @@ static void ima_free_rule(struct ima_rule_entry *entry) kfree(entry); }

+static void ima_lsm_free_rule(struct ima_rule_entry *entry) +{ + int i; + + for (i = 0; i < MAX_LSM_RULES; i++) { + kfree(entry->lsm[i].rule); + kfree(entry->lsm[i].args_p); + } + kfree(entry); +} + +static struct ima_rule_entry *ima_lsm_copy_rule(struct ima_rule_entry *entry) +{ + struct ima_rule_entry *nentry; + int i, result; + + nentry = kmalloc(sizeof(*nentry), GFP_KERNEL); + if (!nentry) + return NULL; + + /* + * Immutable elements are copied over as pointers and data; only + * lsm rules can change + */ + memcpy(nentry, entry, sizeof(*nentry)); + memset(nentry->lsm, 0, FIELD_SIZEOF(struct ima_rule_entry, lsm)); + + for (i = 0; i < MAX_LSM_RULES; i++) { + if (!entry->lsm[i].rule) + continue; + + nentry->lsm[i].type = entry->lsm[i].type; + nentry->lsm[i].args_p = kstrdup(entry->lsm[i].args_p, + GFP_KERNEL); + if (!nentry->lsm[i].args_p) + goto out_err; + + result = security_filter_rule_init(nentry->lsm[i].type, + Audit_equal, + nentry->lsm[i].args_p, + &nentry->lsm[i].rule); + if (result == -EINVAL) + pr_warn("ima: rule for LSM '%d' is undefined\n", + entry->lsm[i].type); + } + return nentry; + +out_err: + ima_lsm_free_rule(nentry); + return NULL; +} + +static int ima_lsm_update_rule(struct ima_rule_entry *entry) +{ + struct ima_rule_entry *nentry; + + nentry = ima_lsm_copy_rule(entry); + if (!nentry) + return -ENOMEM; + + list_replace_rcu(&entry->list, &nentry->list); + ima_lsm_free_rule(entry); + + return 0; +} + /* * The LSM policy can be reloaded, leaving the IMA LSM based rules referring * to the old, stale LSM policy. Update the IMA LSM based rules to reflect - * the reloaded LSM policy. We assume the rules still exist; and BUG_ON() if - * they don't. + * the reloaded LSM policy. */ static void ima_lsm_update_rules(void) { - struct ima_rule_entry *entry; - int result; - int i; + struct ima_rule_entry *entry, *e; + int i, result, needs_update;

- list_for_each_entry(entry, &ima_policy_rules, list) { + list_for_each_entry_safe(entry, e, &ima_policy_rules, list) { + needs_update = 0; for (i = 0; i < MAX_LSM_RULES; i++) { - if (!entry->lsm[i].rule) - continue; - result = security_filter_rule_init(entry->lsm[i].type, - Audit_equal, - entry->lsm[i].args_p, - &entry->lsm[i].rule); - BUG_ON(!entry->lsm[i].rule); + if (entry->lsm[i].rule) { + needs_update = 1; + break; + } + } + if (!needs_update) + continue; + + result = ima_lsm_update_rule(entry); + if (result) { + pr_err("ima: lsm rule update error %d\n", + result); + return; } } }

+int ima_lsm_policy_change(struct notifier_block *nb, unsigned long event, + void *lsm_data) +{ + if (event != LSM_POLICY_CHANGE) + return NOTIFY_DONE; + + ima_lsm_update_rules(); + return NOTIFY_OK; +} + /** * ima_match_rules - determine whether an inode matches the measure rule. * @rule: a pointer to a rule @@ -334,11 +415,10 @@ static bool ima_match_rules(struct ima_rule_entry *rule, struct inode *inode, for (i = 0; i < MAX_LSM_RULES; i++) { int rc = 0; u32 osid; - int retried = 0;

if (!rule->lsm[i].rule) continue; -retry: + switch (i) { case LSM_OBJ_USER: case LSM_OBJ_ROLE: @@ -361,11 +441,6 @@ static bool ima_match_rules(struct ima_rule_entry *rule, struct inode *inode, default: break; } - if ((rc < 0) && (!retried)) { - retried = 1; - ima_lsm_update_rules(); - goto retry; - } if (!rc) return false; }