| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Files | Lines |
|---|
|
If an fsverity builtin signature is given for a file but the
".fs-verity" keyring is empty, there's no real reason to run the PKCS#7
parser. Skip this to avoid the PKCS#7 attack surface when builtin
signature support is configured into the kernel but is not being used.
This is a hardening improvement, not a fix per se, but I've added
Fixes and Cc stable to get it out to more users.
Fixes: 432434c9f8e1 ("fs-verity: support builtin file signatures")
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Reviewed-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230820173237.2579-1-ebiggers@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
|
|
Currently the registration of the fsverity sysctls happens in
signature.c, which couples it to CONFIG_FS_VERITY_BUILTIN_SIGNATURES.
This makes it hard to add new sysctls unrelated to builtin signatures.
Also, some users have started checking whether the directory
/proc/sys/fs/verity exists as a way to tell whether fsverity is
supported. This isn't the intended method; instead, the existence of
/sys/fs/$fstype/features/verity should be checked, or users should just
try to use the fsverity ioctls. Regardless, it should be made to work
as expected without a dependency on CONFIG_FS_VERITY_BUILTIN_SIGNATURES.
Therefore, move the sysctl registration into init.c. With
CONFIG_FS_VERITY_BUILTIN_SIGNATURES, nothing changes. Without it, but
with CONFIG_FS_VERITY, an empty list of sysctls is now registered.
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230705212743.42180-3-ebiggers@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
|
|
Since CONFIG_FS_VERITY is a bool, not a tristate, fs/verity/ can only be
builtin or absent entirely; it can't be a loadable module. Therefore,
the error code that gets returned from the fsverity_init() initcall is
never used. If any part of the initcall does fail, which should never
happen, the kernel will be left in a bad state.
Following the usual convention for builtin code, just panic the kernel
if any of part of the initcall fails.
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230705212743.42180-2-ebiggers@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
|
|
fsverity builtin signatures (CONFIG_FS_VERITY_BUILTIN_SIGNATURES) aren't
the only way to do signatures with fsverity, and they have some major
limitations. Yet, more users have tried to use them, e.g. recently by
https://github.com/ostreedev/ostree/pull/2640. In most cases this seems
to be because users aren't sufficiently familiar with the limitations of
this feature and what the alternatives are.
Therefore, make some updates to the documentation to try to clarify the
properties of this feature and nudge users in the right direction.
Note that the Integrity Policy Enforcement (IPE) LSM, which is not yet
upstream, is planned to use the builtin signatures. (This differs from
IMA, which uses its own signature mechanism.) For that reason, my
earlier patch "fsverity: mark builtin signatures as deprecated"
(https://lore.kernel.org/r/20221208033548.122704-1-ebiggers@kernel.org),
which marked builtin signatures as "deprecated", was controversial.
This patch therefore stops short of marking the feature as deprecated.
I've also revised the language to focus on better explaining the feature
and what its alternatives are.
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230620041937.5809-1-ebiggers@kernel.org
Reviewed-by: Colin Walters <walters@verbum.org>
Reviewed-by: Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org>
Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
|
|
register_sysctl_paths() is only needed if your child (directories) have
entries but this does not so just use register_sysctl() so to do away
with the path specification.
Signed-off-by: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230302202826.776286-10-mcgrof@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
|
|
I've gotten very little use out of these debug messages, and I'm not
aware of anyone else having used them.
Indeed, sprinkling pr_debug around is not really a best practice these
days, especially for filesystem code. Tracepoints are used instead.
Let's just remove these and start from a clean slate.
This change does not affect info, warning, and error messages.
Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20221215060420.60692-1-ebiggers@kernel.org
|
|
Now that fsverity_get_descriptor() validates the sig_size field,
fsverity_verify_signature() doesn't need to do it.
Just change the prototype of fsverity_verify_signature() to take the
signature directly rather than take a fsverity_descriptor.
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210115181819.34732-3-ebiggers@kernel.org
Reviewed-by: Victor Hsieh <victorhsieh@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@kernel.org>
Reviewed-by: Amy Parker <enbyamy@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Chao Yu <yuchao0@huawei.com>
Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
|
|
I originally chose the name "file measurement" to refer to the fs-verity
file digest to avoid confusion with traditional full-file digests or
with the bare root hash of the Merkle tree.
But the name "file measurement" hasn't caught on, and usually people are
calling it something else, usually the "file digest". E.g. see
"struct fsverity_digest" and "struct fsverity_formatted_digest", the
libfsverity_compute_digest() and libfsverity_sign_digest() functions in
libfsverity, and the "fsverity digest" command.
Having multiple names for the same thing is always confusing.
So to hopefully avoid confusion in the future, rename
"fs-verity file measurement" to "fs-verity file digest".
This leaves FS_IOC_MEASURE_VERITY as the only reference to "measure" in
the kernel, which makes some amount of sense since the ioctl is actively
"measuring" the file.
I'll be renaming this in fsverity-utils too (though similarly the
'fsverity measure' command, which is a wrapper for
FS_IOC_MEASURE_VERITY, will stay).
Acked-by: Luca Boccassi <luca.boccassi@microsoft.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20201113211918.71883-4-ebiggers@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
|
|
The name "struct fsverity_signed_digest" is causing confusion because it
isn't actually a signed digest, but rather it's the way that the digest
is formatted in order to be signed. Rename it to
"struct fsverity_formatted_digest" to prevent this confusion.
Also update the struct's comment to clarify that it's specific to the
built-in signature verification support and isn't a requirement for all
fs-verity users.
I'll be renaming this struct in fsverity-utils too.
Acked-by: Luca Boccassi <luca.boccassi@microsoft.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20201113211918.71883-3-ebiggers@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
|
|
Embedding the file path inside kernel source code files isn't
particularly useful as often files are moved around and the paths become
incorrect. checkpatch.pl warns about this since v5.10-rc1.
Acked-by: Luca Boccassi <luca.boccassi@microsoft.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20201113211918.71883-2-ebiggers@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
|
|
Fix all kerneldoc warnings in fs/verity/ and include/linux/fsverity.h.
Most of these were due to missing documentation for function parameters.
Detected with:
scripts/kernel-doc -v -none fs/verity/*.{c,h} include/linux/fsverity.h
This cleanup makes it possible to check new patches for kerneldoc
warnings without having to filter out all the existing ones.
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200511192118.71427-2-ebiggers@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
|
|
To meet some users' needs, add optional support for having fs-verity
handle a portion of the authentication policy in the kernel. An
".fs-verity" keyring is created to which X.509 certificates can be
added; then a sysctl 'fs.verity.require_signatures' can be set to cause
the kernel to enforce that all fs-verity files contain a signature of
their file measurement by a key in this keyring.
See the "Built-in signature verification" section of
Documentation/filesystems/fsverity.rst for the full documentation.
Reviewed-by: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>
Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
|
Eric Biggers
Luis Chamberlain
