diff mbox series

[v10,13/14] arm64: kexec_file: add kernel signature verification support

Message ID 20180623022058.10935-14-takahiro.akashi@linaro.org
State Superseded
Headers show
Series arm64: kexec: add kexec_file_load() support | expand

Commit Message

AKASHI Takahiro June 23, 2018, 2:20 a.m. UTC
With this patch, kernel verification can be done without IMA security
subsystem enabled. Turn on CONFIG_KEXEC_VERIFY_SIG instead.

On x86, a signature is embedded into a PE file (Microsoft's format) header
of binary. Since arm64's "Image" can also be seen as a PE file as far as
CONFIG_EFI is enabled, we adopt this format for kernel signing.

You can create a signed kernel image with:
    $ sbsign --key ${KEY} --cert ${CERT} Image

Signed-off-by: AKASHI Takahiro <takahiro.akashi@linaro.org>

Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
---
 arch/arm64/Kconfig              | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++++++
 arch/arm64/kernel/kexec_image.c | 15 +++++++++++++++
 2 files changed, 39 insertions(+)

-- 
2.17.0

Comments

James Morse July 3, 2018, 5:47 p.m. UTC | #1
Hi Akashi,

On 23/06/18 03:20, AKASHI Takahiro wrote:
> With this patch, kernel verification can be done without IMA security

> subsystem enabled. Turn on CONFIG_KEXEC_VERIFY_SIG instead.

> 

> On x86, a signature is embedded into a PE file (Microsoft's format) header

> of binary. Since arm64's "Image" can also be seen as a PE file as far as

> CONFIG_EFI is enabled, we adopt this format for kernel signing.

> 

> You can create a signed kernel image with:

>     $ sbsign --key ${KEY} --cert ${CERT} Image


> diff --git a/arch/arm64/Kconfig b/arch/arm64/Kconfig

> index f68318f61c85..5133c22a01ab 100644

> --- a/arch/arm64/Kconfig

> +++ b/arch/arm64/Kconfig

> @@ -845,6 +845,30 @@ config KEXEC_FILE

>  	  for kernel and initramfs as opposed to list of segments as

>  	  accepted by previous system call.

>  

> +config KEXEC_VERIFY_SIG

> +	bool "Verify kernel signature during kexec_file_load() syscall"

> +	depends on KEXEC_FILE

> +	help

> +	  Select this option to verify a signature with loaded kernel

> +	  image. If configured, any attempt of loading a image without

> +	  valid signature will fail.

> +

> +	  In addition to that option, you need to enable signature

> +	  verification for the corresponding kernel image type being

> +	  loaded in order for this to work.

> +

> +config KEXEC_IMAGE_VERIFY_SIG

> +	bool "Enable Image signature verification support"

> +	default y

> +	depends on KEXEC_VERIFY_SIG

> +	depends on EFI && SIGNED_PE_FILE_VERIFICATION

> +	help

> +	  Enable Image signature verification support.

> +

> +comment "Image signature verification is missing yet"

> +	depends on KEXEC_VERIFY_SIG

> +	depends on !EFI || !SIGNED_PE_FILE_VERIFICATION



This comment thing is a good idea, but its also a bit confusing... it took me
quite a while to work out what was missing. Could we phrase it something like:
"Support for PE file signature verification disabled!"
This tells us its about PE files, and its probably a missing config option
somewhere, not some code that hasn't been written yet. (which was my first
assumption!).

KEXEC_VERIFY_SIG presumably turns on just the IMA verification, which verifies
the Image, but not in the same way as KEXEC_IMAGE_VERIFY_SIG.... (if I've
understood it properly) Is there any reason to have these as separate enables?
Couldn't we 'select SIGNED_PE_FILE_VERIFICATION if EFI' in KEXEC_VERIFY_SIG?
This would mean there is one option to verify signatures, instead of two...
(does it really depend on EFI?)


Thanks,

James
AKASHI Takahiro July 9, 2018, 9:01 a.m. UTC | #2
On Tue, Jul 03, 2018 at 06:47:38PM +0100, James Morse wrote:
> Hi Akashi,

> 

> On 23/06/18 03:20, AKASHI Takahiro wrote:

> > With this patch, kernel verification can be done without IMA security

> > subsystem enabled. Turn on CONFIG_KEXEC_VERIFY_SIG instead.

> > 

> > On x86, a signature is embedded into a PE file (Microsoft's format) header

> > of binary. Since arm64's "Image" can also be seen as a PE file as far as

> > CONFIG_EFI is enabled, we adopt this format for kernel signing.

> > 

> > You can create a signed kernel image with:

> >     $ sbsign --key ${KEY} --cert ${CERT} Image

> 

> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/Kconfig b/arch/arm64/Kconfig

> > index f68318f61c85..5133c22a01ab 100644

> > --- a/arch/arm64/Kconfig

> > +++ b/arch/arm64/Kconfig

> > @@ -845,6 +845,30 @@ config KEXEC_FILE

> >  	  for kernel and initramfs as opposed to list of segments as

> >  	  accepted by previous system call.

> >  

> > +config KEXEC_VERIFY_SIG

> > +	bool "Verify kernel signature during kexec_file_load() syscall"

> > +	depends on KEXEC_FILE

> > +	help

> > +	  Select this option to verify a signature with loaded kernel

> > +	  image. If configured, any attempt of loading a image without

> > +	  valid signature will fail.

> > +

> > +	  In addition to that option, you need to enable signature

> > +	  verification for the corresponding kernel image type being

> > +	  loaded in order for this to work.

> > +

> > +config KEXEC_IMAGE_VERIFY_SIG

> > +	bool "Enable Image signature verification support"

> > +	default y

> > +	depends on KEXEC_VERIFY_SIG

> > +	depends on EFI && SIGNED_PE_FILE_VERIFICATION

> > +	help

> > +	  Enable Image signature verification support.

> > +

> > +comment "Image signature verification is missing yet"

> > +	depends on KEXEC_VERIFY_SIG

> > +	depends on !EFI || !SIGNED_PE_FILE_VERIFICATION

> 

> 

> This comment thing is a good idea, but its also a bit confusing... it took me

> quite a while to work out what was missing. Could we phrase it something like:

> "Support for PE file signature verification disabled!"


OK.

> This tells us its about PE files, and its probably a missing config option

> somewhere, not some code that hasn't been written yet. (which was my first

> assumption!).

> 

> KEXEC_VERIFY_SIG presumably turns on just the IMA verification, which verifies

> the Image, but not in the same way as KEXEC_IMAGE_VERIFY_SIG.... (if I've

> understood it properly)


I'm afraid that I'm not clear at the cover letter.
Those two mechanisms, IMA verification and kexec-specific verification,
are totally different. The former is relatively new as well as generic,
and doesn't even require KEXEC_VERIFY_SIG at all as all the stuff is done
under IMA framework (via security hooks) with extended file attributes.

On the other hand, KEXEC_VERIFY_SIG is just an option that turns on
verification check in a kexec-specific (and more importantly arch-specific
and file-format-specific) manner through 'kexec_file_ops->verify interface.'

> Is there any reason to have these as separate enables?


If you are talking about KEXEC_VERIFY_SIG and KEXEC_IMAGE_VERIFY_SIG,
it is a leftover when "vmlinux" image was also supported in my
old versions of kexec_file patch set.
But please note that x86 also retains two separate configuration options,
KEXEC_VERIFY_SIG and KEXEC_BZIMAGE_VERIFY_SIG.
I simply followed that.

> Couldn't we 'select SIGNED_PE_FILE_VERIFICATION if EFI' in KEXEC_VERIFY_SIG?


I didn't "select" SIGNED_PE_FILE_VERIFICATION here following
"kbuild/kconfig-language.txt" which suggests, "use select only for
non-visible symbols (no prompts anywhere)."

> This would mean there is one option to verify signatures, instead of two...

> (does it really depend on EFI?)


Strictly speaking, SIGNED_PE_FILE_VERIFICATION depends on the fact
that a binary file is in PE format, which means that EFI is enabled
on arm64.
It is possible to support KEXEC_VERIFY_SIG for non-PE binaries, but
in that case, we will have to invent a new (arm64-specific) way of
verification.
(For instance, we might want to add a kexec-specific ELF segment to vmlinux.)

Thanks,
-Takahiro AKASHI

> 

> Thanks,

> 

> James
diff mbox series

Patch

diff --git a/arch/arm64/Kconfig b/arch/arm64/Kconfig
index f68318f61c85..5133c22a01ab 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/Kconfig
+++ b/arch/arm64/Kconfig
@@ -845,6 +845,30 @@  config KEXEC_FILE
 	  for kernel and initramfs as opposed to list of segments as
 	  accepted by previous system call.
 
+config KEXEC_VERIFY_SIG
+	bool "Verify kernel signature during kexec_file_load() syscall"
+	depends on KEXEC_FILE
+	help
+	  Select this option to verify a signature with loaded kernel
+	  image. If configured, any attempt of loading a image without
+	  valid signature will fail.
+
+	  In addition to that option, you need to enable signature
+	  verification for the corresponding kernel image type being
+	  loaded in order for this to work.
+
+config KEXEC_IMAGE_VERIFY_SIG
+	bool "Enable Image signature verification support"
+	default y
+	depends on KEXEC_VERIFY_SIG
+	depends on EFI && SIGNED_PE_FILE_VERIFICATION
+	help
+	  Enable Image signature verification support.
+
+comment "Image signature verification is missing yet"
+	depends on KEXEC_VERIFY_SIG
+	depends on !EFI || !SIGNED_PE_FILE_VERIFICATION
+
 config CRASH_DUMP
 	bool "Build kdump crash kernel"
 	help
diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/kexec_image.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/kexec_image.c
index df1e341d3a28..bb0a95add197 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/kernel/kexec_image.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/kexec_image.c
@@ -13,6 +13,7 @@ 
 #include <linux/kernel.h>
 #include <linux/kexec.h>
 #include <linux/string.h>
+#include <linux/verification.h>
 #include <asm/boot.h>
 #include <asm/byteorder.h>
 #include <asm/cpufeature.h>
@@ -28,6 +29,9 @@  static int image_probe(const char *kernel_buf, unsigned long kernel_len)
 			!memcmp(&h->magic, ARM64_MAGIC, sizeof(ARM64_MAGIC)))
 		return -EINVAL;
 
+	pr_debug("PE format: %s\n",
+			memcmp(&h->mz_magic, "MZ", 2) ?  "no" : "yes");
+
 	return 0;
 }
 
@@ -107,7 +111,18 @@  static void *image_load(struct kimage *image,
 	return ERR_PTR(ret);
 }
 
+#ifdef CONFIG_KEXEC_IMAGE_VERIFY_SIG
+static int image_verify_sig(const char *kernel, unsigned long kernel_len)
+{
+	return verify_pefile_signature(kernel, kernel_len, NULL,
+				       VERIFYING_KEXEC_PE_SIGNATURE);
+}
+#endif
+
 const struct kexec_file_ops kexec_image_ops = {
 	.probe = image_probe,
 	.load = image_load,
+#ifdef CONFIG_KEXEC_IMAGE_VERIFY_SIG
+	.verify_sig = image_verify_sig,
+#endif
 };