lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [May]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH 3/4] ima: don't ignore INTEGRITY_UNKNOWN EVM status
From
Date
On Tue, 2019-05-21 at 09:26 +0200, Roberto Sassu wrote:
> On 5/20/2019 11:20 PM, Mimi Zohar wrote:
> > On Thu, 2019-05-16 at 18:12 +0200, Roberto Sassu wrote:
> >> diff --git a/Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt b/Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt
> >> index 52e6fbb042cc..80e1c233656b 100644
> >> --- a/Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt
> >> +++ b/Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt
> >> @@ -1588,6 +1588,9 @@
> >> Format: { "off" | "enforce" | "fix" | "log" }
> >> default: "enforce"
> >>
> >> + ima_appraise_req_evm
> >> + [IMA] require EVM for appraisal with file digests.
> >
> > As much as possible we want to limit the number of new boot command
> > line options as possible.  Is there a reason for not extending
> > "ima_appraise=" with "require-evm" or "enforce-evm"?
>
> ima-appraise= can be disabled with CONFIG_IMA_APPRAISE_BOOTPARAM, which
> probably is done when the system is in production.
>
> Should I allow to use ima-appraise=require-evm even if
> CONFIG_IMA_APPRAISE_BOOTPARAM=n?

Yes, that should be fine.  It's making "ima_appraise" stricter.

Mimi

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-05-21 13:49    [W:0.045 / U:7.068 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site