If enabled, we fallback to the platform keyring if the trusted keyring
doesn't have the key used to sign the ipe policy. But if pkcs7_verify()
rejects the key for other reasons, such as usage restrictions, we do not
fallback. Do so, following the same change in dm-verity.

Signed-off-by: Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org>
Suggested-by: Serge Hallyn <serge@hallyn.com>
[FW: fixed some line length issues and a typo in the commit message]
Signed-off-by: Fan Wu <wufan@kernel.org>

The current policy management makes it impossible to use IPE
in a general purpose distribution. In such cases the users are not
building the kernel, the distribution is, and access to the private
key included in the trusted keyring is, for obvious reason, not
available.
This means that users have no way to enable IPE, since there will
be no built-in generic policy, and no access to the key to sign
updates validated by the trusted keyring.

Just as we do for dm-verity, kernel modules and more, allow the
secondary and platform keyrings to also validate policies. This
allows users enrolling their own keys in UEFI db or MOK to also
sign policies, and enroll them. This makes it sensible to enable
IPE in general purpose distributions, as it becomes usable by
any user wishing to do so. Keys in these keyrings can already
load kernels and kernel modules, so there is no security
downgrade.

Add a kconfig each, like dm-verity does, but default to enabled if
the dependencies are available.

Signed-off-by: Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org>
Reviewed-by: Serge Hallyn <serge@hallyn.com>
[FW: fixed some style issues]
Signed-off-by: Fan Wu <wufan@kernel.org>

Currently IPE accepts an update that has the same version as the policy
being updated, but it doesn't make it a no-op nor it checks that the
old and new policyes are the same. So it is possible to change the
content of a policy, without changing its version. This is very
confusing from userspace when managing policies.
Instead change the update logic to reject updates that have the same
version with ESTALE, as that is much clearer and intuitive behaviour.

Signed-off-by: Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org>
Reviewed-by: Serge Hallyn <serge@hallyn.com>
Signed-off-by: Fan Wu <wufan@kernel.org>

When loading policies in userspace we want a recognizable error when an
update attempts to use an old policy, as that is an error that needs
to be treated differently from an invalid policy. Use -ESTALE as it is
clear enough for an update mechanism.

Signed-off-by: Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org>
Reviewed-by: Serge Hallyn <serge@hallyn.com>
Signed-off-by: Fan Wu <wufan@kernel.org>

Patch series "remove PF_MEMALLOC_NORECLAIM" v3.


This patch (of 2):

bch2_new_inode relies on PF_MEMALLOC_NORECLAIM to try to allocate a new
inode to achieve GFP_NOWAIT semantic while holding locks. If this
allocation fails it will drop locks and use GFP_NOFS allocation context.

We would like to drop PF_MEMALLOC_NORECLAIM because it is really
dangerous to use if the caller doesn't control the full call chain with
this flag set. E.g. if any of the function down the chain needed
GFP_NOFAIL request the PF_MEMALLOC_NORECLAIM would override this and
cause unexpected failure.

While this is not the case in this particular case using the scoped gfp
semantic is not really needed bacause we can easily pus the allocation
context down the chain without too much clutter.

[akpm@linux-foundation.org: fix kerneldoc warnings]
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20240926172940.167084-1-mhocko@kernel.org
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20240926172940.167084-2-mhocko@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Reviewed-by: Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz> # For vfs changes
Cc: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Cc: Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>
Cc: James Morris <jmorris@namei.org>
Cc: Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@linux.dev>
Cc: Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore.com>
Cc: Serge E. Hallyn <serge@hallyn.com>
Cc: Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@gmail.com>
Cc: Matthew Wilcox (Oracle) <willy@infradead.org>
Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>

Pull hardening fixes from Kees Cook:

 - gcc plugins: Avoid Kconfig warnings with randstruct (Nathan
   Chancellor)

 - MAINTAINERS: Add security/Kconfig.hardening to hardening section
   (Nathan Chancellor)

 - MAINTAINERS: Add unsafe_memcpy() to the FORTIFY review list

* tag 'hardening-v6.12-rc2' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/kees/linux:
  MAINTAINERS: Add security/Kconfig.hardening to hardening section
  hardening: Adjust dependencies in selection of MODVERSIONS
  MAINTAINERS: Add unsafe_memcpy() to the FORTIFY review list

Pull lsm revert from Paul Moore:
 "Here is the CONFIG_SECURITY_TOMOYO_LKM revert that we've been
  discussing this week. With near unanimous agreement that the original
  TOMOYO patches were not the right way to solve the distro problem
  Tetsuo is trying the solve, reverting is our best option at this time"

* tag 'lsm-pr-20241004' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/pcmoore/lsm:
  tomoyo: revert CONFIG_SECURITY_TOMOYO_LKM support

This patch reverts two TOMOYO patches that were merged into Linus' tree
during the v6.12 merge window:

8b985bbfabbe ("tomoyo: allow building as a loadable LSM module")
268225a1de1a ("tomoyo: preparation step for building as a loadable LSM module")

Together these two patches introduced the CONFIG_SECURITY_TOMOYO_LKM
Kconfig build option which enabled a TOMOYO specific dynamic LSM loading
mechanism (see the original commits for more details).  Unfortunately,
this approach was widely rejected by the LSM community as well as some
members of the general kernel community.  Objections included concerns
over setting a bad precedent regarding individual LSMs managing their
LSM callback registrations as well as general kernel symbol exporting
practices.  With little to no support for the CONFIG_SECURITY_TOMOYO_LKM
approach outside of Tetsuo, and multiple objections, we need to revert
these changes.

Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/0c4b443a-9c72-4800-97e8-a3816b6a9ae2@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/CAHC9VhR=QjdoHG3wJgHFJkKYBg7vkQH2MpffgVzQ0tAByo_wRg@mail.gmail.com
Acked-by: John Johansen <john.johansen@canonical.com>
Signed-off-by: Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore.com>

asm/unaligned.h is always an include of asm-generic/unaligned.h;
might as well move that thing to linux/unaligned.h and include
that - there's nothing arch-specific in that header.

auto-generated by the following:

for i in `git grep -l -w asm/unaligned.h`; do
	sed -i -e "s/asm\/unaligned.h/linux\/unaligned.h/" $i
done
for i in `git grep -l -w asm-generic/unaligned.h`; do
	sed -i -e "s/asm-generic\/unaligned.h/linux\/unaligned.h/" $i
done
git mv include/asm-generic/unaligned.h include/linux/unaligned.h
git mv tools/include/asm-generic/unaligned.h tools/include/linux/unaligned.h
sed -i -e "/unaligned.h/d" include/asm-generic/Kbuild
sed -i -e "s/__ASM_GENERIC/__LINUX/" include/linux/unaligned.h tools/include/linux/unaligned.h

MODVERSIONS recently grew a dependency on !COMPILE_TEST so that Rust
could be more easily tested. However, this introduces a Kconfig warning
when building allmodconfig with a clang version that supports RANDSTRUCT
natively because RANDSTRUCT_FULL and RANDSTRUCT_PERFORMANCE select
MODVERSIONS when MODULES is enabled, bypassing the !COMPILE_TEST
dependency:

  WARNING: unmet direct dependencies detected for MODVERSIONS
    Depends on [n]: MODULES [=y] && !COMPILE_TEST [=y]
    Selected by [y]:
    - RANDSTRUCT_FULL [=y] && (CC_HAS_RANDSTRUCT [=y] || GCC_PLUGINS [=n]) && MODULES [=y]

Add the !COMPILE_TEST dependency to the selections to clear up the
warning.

Fixes: 1f9c4a996756 ("Kbuild: make MODVERSIONS support depend on not being a compile test build")
Signed-off-by: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240928-fix-randstruct-modversions-kconfig-warning-v1-1-27d3edc8571e@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <kees@kernel.org>