From patchwork Mon Apr 27 10:28:59 2020 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Roberto Sassu X-Patchwork-Id: 11511825 Return-Path: Received: from mail.kernel.org (pdx-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [172.30.200.123]) by pdx-korg-patchwork-2.web.codeaurora.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F94681 for ; Mon, 27 Apr 2020 10:31:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60BE8206D9 for ; Mon, 27 Apr 2020 10:31:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726954AbgD0Kby (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Apr 2020 06:31:54 -0400 Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com ([185.176.76.210]:2109 "EHLO huawei.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727058AbgD0Kbo (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Apr 2020 06:31:44 -0400 Received: from lhreml726-chm.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.18.7.108]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id 06CEB882E7E7C5ABDB47; Mon, 27 Apr 2020 11:31:43 +0100 (IST) Received: from fraeml714-chm.china.huawei.com (10.206.15.33) by lhreml726-chm.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.77) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.1913.5; Mon, 27 Apr 2020 11:31:42 +0100 Received: from roberto-HP-EliteDesk-800-G2-DM-65W.huawei.com (10.204.65.160) by fraeml714-chm.china.huawei.com (10.206.15.33) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.1913.5; Mon, 27 Apr 2020 12:31:41 +0200 From: Roberto Sassu To: , CC: , , , , , , Roberto Sassu Subject: [PATCH v2 5/6] ima: Set again build_ima_appraise variable Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2020 12:28:59 +0200 Message-ID: <20200427102900.18887-5-roberto.sassu@huawei.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.17.1 In-Reply-To: <20200427102900.18887-1-roberto.sassu@huawei.com> References: <20200427102900.18887-1-roberto.sassu@huawei.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Originating-IP: [10.204.65.160] X-ClientProxiedBy: lhreml710-chm.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.61) To fraeml714-chm.china.huawei.com (10.206.15.33) X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Sender: linux-integrity-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org From: Krzysztof Struczynski After adding the new add_rule() function in commit c52657d93b05 ("ima: refactor ima_init_policy()"), all appraisal flags are added to the temp_ima_appraise variable. Revert to the previous behavior instead of removing build_ima_appraise, to benefit from the protection offered by __ro_after_init. The mentioned commit introduced a bug, as it makes all the flags modifiable, while build_ima_appraise flags can be protected with __ro_after_init. Changelog v1: - set build_ima_appraise instead of removing it (suggested by Mimi) Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # 5.0.x Fixes: c52657d93b05 ("ima: refactor ima_init_policy()") Co-developed-by: Roberto Sassu Signed-off-by: Roberto Sassu Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Struczynski --- security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c | 10 ++++++++-- 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c b/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c index ea9b991f0232..ef7f68cc935e 100644 --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_policy.c @@ -643,8 +643,14 @@ static void add_rules(struct ima_rule_entry *entries, int count, list_add_tail(&entry->list, &ima_policy_rules); } - if (entries[i].action == APPRAISE) - temp_ima_appraise |= ima_appraise_flag(entries[i].func); + if (entries[i].action == APPRAISE) { + if (entries != build_appraise_rules) + temp_ima_appraise |= + ima_appraise_flag(entries[i].func); + else + build_ima_appraise |= + ima_appraise_flag(entries[i].func); + } } }