Signing BPF programs has been a long ongoing discussion and there has been some more concrete work and discussions since the BPF office hours talk in June.
There was a BoF session at the Linux security summit in Austin between BPF folks (KP and Florent) and IMA developers (Mimi, Stefan and Elaine) to agree on a solution to have IMA use BPF signatures.
The BPF position is to provide maximum flexibility to the user on how the programs are signed. For this. They way the programs are signed (format, kind of hash) and the way the signature is verified should be up-to the user. IMA is one of the users of BPF signatures.
The goal of this session is to discuss a gatekeeper and signing implementation that works with IMA and the options that are available for IMA and agree on a solution to move forward.
The current kernel convention where IMA hard codes a callback into the security_* hooks is at odds with the BPF philosophy of providing flexibility to the user. But, we do see a common ground that can work the best for BPF, IMA and most importantly, the users.
|I agree to abide by the anti-harassment policy||Yes|