Re: [RFC PATCH v2 1/3] ima: extend clone() with IMA namespace support

[Stefan Berger]

On 03/15/2018 03:01 PM, James Bottomley wrote:
> On Thu, 2018-03-15 at 14:51 -0400, Stefan Berger wrote:
> > On 03/15/2018 02:45 PM, James Bottomley wrote:
> [...]
> > > > > going to need some type of keyring namespace and there's
> > > > > already
> > > > > one hanging off the user_ns:
> > > > >
> > > > > commit f36f8c75ae2e7d4da34f4c908cebdb4aa42c977e
> > > > > Author: David Howells <dhowells@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > Date:   Tue Sep 24 10:35:19 2013 +0100
> > > > >
> > > > >        KEYS: Add per-user_namespace registers for persistent
> > > > > per-UID
> > > > > kerberos caches
> > > > The benefit for IMA would be that this would then tie the keys
> > > > needed for appraising to the IMA namespace's policy.
> > > > However, if you have an appraise policy in your IMA namespace,
> > > > which is now hooked to the user namespace, and you join that user
> > > > namespace but your files don't have signatures, nothing will
> > > > execute anymore. That's now a side effect of joining this user
> > > > namespace unless we have a magic  exception. My feeling is,
> > > > people may not like that...
> > > Agree, but I think the magic might be to populate the ima keyring
> > > with the parent on user_ns creation.  That way the user_ns owner
> > > can delete the parent keys if they don't like them, but by default
> > > the parent appraisal policy should just work.
> > That may add keys to your keyring but doesn't get you signatures on
> > your  files.
> But it doesn't need to.  The only way we'd get a failure is if the file
> is already being appraised and we lose access to the key.  If the
> parent policy isn't appraisal, entering the IMA NS won't cause
> appraisal to be turned on unless the owner asks for it, in which case
> it's caveat emptor: As it works today, if as root I add a default
> appraisal policy to IMA without either a key or xattrs, I get an
> unusable system.

When I post a next implementation for the spawning if an IMA namespace, 
what shall be the criterion for accepting it?

    Stefan

> James
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-security-module" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html