Re: [PATCH v5 04/12] integrity: restrict INTEGRITY_KEYRING_MACHINE to restrict_link_by_ca

[Mimi Zohar]

On Tue, 2021-09-07 at 12:01 -0400, Eric Snowberg wrote:
> Set the restriction check for INTEGRITY_KEYRING_MACHINE keys to
> restrict_link_by_ca.  This will only allow CA keys into the machine
> keyring.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Eric Snowberg <eric.snowberg@xxxxxxxxxx>

Normally the new function, in this case the restriction, and usage
should be defined together.  Any reason why 3/12 and 4/12 are two
separate patches?  I would squash them together.

> ---
> v1: Initial version
> v2: Added !IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_INTEGRITY_TRUSTED_KEYRING check so mok
>     keyring gets created even when it isn't enabled
> v3: Rename restrict_link_by_system_trusted_or_ca to restrict_link_by_ca
> v4: removed unnecessary restriction->check set
> v5: Rename to machine keyring
> ---
>  security/integrity/digsig.c | 8 ++++++--
>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/security/integrity/digsig.c b/security/integrity/digsig.c
> index 5a75ac2c4dbe..2b75bbbd9e0e 100644
> --- a/security/integrity/digsig.c
> +++ b/security/integrity/digsig.c
> @@ -132,14 +132,18 @@ int __init integrity_init_keyring(const unsigned int id)
>  		goto out;
>  	}
>  
> -	if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_INTEGRITY_TRUSTED_KEYRING))
> +	if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_INTEGRITY_TRUSTED_KEYRING) && id != INTEGRITY_KEYRING_MACHINE)

Over 80 chars, please split the line.

thanks,

Mimi

>  		return 0;
>  
>  	restriction = kzalloc(sizeof(struct key_restriction), GFP_KERNEL);
>  	if (!restriction)
>  		return -ENOMEM;
>  
> -	restriction->check = restrict_link_to_ima;
> +	if (id == INTEGRITY_KEYRING_MACHINE)
> +		restriction->check = restrict_link_by_ca;
> +	else
> +		restriction->check = restrict_link_to_ima;
> +
>  	if (id != INTEGRITY_KEYRING_MACHINE)
>  		perm |= KEY_USR_WRITE;
>