From: "Marvin Häuser" <mhaeuser@posteo.de>
To: Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@redhat.com>
Cc: edk2-devel-groups-io <devel@edk2.groups.io>,
Pawel Polawski <ppolawsk@redhat.com>,
Jiewen Yao <jiewen.yao@intel.com>,
jmaloy@redhat.com, Min Xu <min.m.xu@intel.com>,
Jian J Wang <jian.j.wang@intel.com>,
Oliver Steffen <osteffen@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] SecurityPkg/DxeImageVerificationLib: Check result of GetEfiGlobalVariable2
Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2023 08:47:10 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <50ACE54B-1E92-4469-BD8F-FBC02FFEF061@posteo.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230228061222.duxm66xdrvsnlgxc@sirius.home.kraxel.org>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3541 bytes --]
> On 28. Feb 2023, at 07:12, Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
>>> (a) the SecureBoot variable is not present (EFI_NOT_FOUND) according to
>>> the return value, or
>>
>> @Maintainers Would there be any objection to drop this and skip the SB checks only when explicitly disabled?
>> Please explicitly respond even if not, so we don't end up with everyone silently agreeing, but forgetting about the patch after. Thanks! :)
>
> I hold back v2, waiting for an answer here.
>
>>> - if (*SecureBoot == SECURE_BOOT_MODE_DISABLE) {
>>> - FreePool (SecureBoot);
>>> + if ((VarStatus == EFI_SUCCESS) && (SecureBoot == SECURE_BOOT_MODE_DISABLE)) {
>>
>> I would check the attributes here as well. They should be BS | RT, but
>> explicitly not NV. This would force the SB checks in case a malicious
>> actor somehow managed to store a persistent disable-value variable (be
>> that a bug, physical access, or other means).
>
> Like this (incremental fixup)?
Sorry, I formulated it a bit vague - what I meant is that the attributes should be exactly BS | RT (i.e., equal to), but I see how adding it must not be NV sounds like it should be just those three Bits checked. Otherwise, yes, thanks a lot!
It’s a read-only status reporting variable, so even with future changes, setting any of the other attributes wouldn’t make much sense. BS | RT is what the spec currently dictates (there is a table here: https://uefi.org/specs/UEFI/2.10/03_Boot_Manager.html).
>
> Do we have macros for variable attribute checking?
> Havn't seen anything while skimming variable-related headers ...
Don’t think so. Not sure there is much attribute-checking done to begin with outside VarCheckLib. The only stack I’ve seen doing this extensively is recent-years Mac EFI.
Best regards,
Marvin
>
> take care,
> Gerd
>
> diff --git a/SecurityPkg/Library/DxeImageVerificationLib/DxeImageVerificationLib.c b/SecurityPkg/Library/DxeImageVerificationLib/DxeImageVerificationLib.c
> index f29a27e5a053..79c784f77ac8 100644
> --- a/SecurityPkg/Library/DxeImageVerificationLib/DxeImageVerificationLib.c
> +++ b/SecurityPkg/Library/DxeImageVerificationLib/DxeImageVerificationLib.c
> @@ -1688,6 +1688,7 @@ DxeImageVerificationHandler (
> EFI_STATUS HashStatus;
> EFI_STATUS DbStatus;
> EFI_STATUS VarStatus;
> + UINT32 VarAttr;
> BOOLEAN IsFound;
>
> SignatureList = NULL;
> @@ -1745,7 +1746,7 @@ DxeImageVerificationHandler (
> }
>
> SecureBootSize = sizeof (SecureBoot);
> - VarStatus = gRT->GetVariable (EFI_SECURE_BOOT_MODE_NAME, &gEfiGlobalVariableGuid, NULL, &SecureBootSize, &SecureBoot);
> + VarStatus = gRT->GetVariable (EFI_SECURE_BOOT_MODE_NAME, &gEfiGlobalVariableGuid, &VarAttr, &SecureBootSize, &SecureBoot);
> //
> // Skip verification if SecureBoot variable doesn't exist.
> //
> @@ -1756,7 +1757,12 @@ DxeImageVerificationHandler (
> //
> // Skip verification if SecureBoot is disabled but not AuditMode
> //
> - if ((VarStatus == EFI_SUCCESS) && (SecureBoot == SECURE_BOOT_MODE_DISABLE)) {
> + if ((VarStatus == EFI_SUCCESS) &&
> + !(VarAttr & EFI_VARIABLE_NON_VOLATILE) &&
> + (VarAttr & EFI_VARIABLE_BOOTSERVICE_ACCESS) &&
> + (VarAttr & EFI_VARIABLE_RUNTIME_ACCESS) &&
> + (SecureBoot == SECURE_BOOT_MODE_DISABLE))
> + {
> return EFI_SUCCESS;
> }
>
>
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 6691 bytes --]
prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-02-28 8:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-02-27 12:55 [PATCH 1/1] SecurityPkg/DxeImageVerificationLib: Check result of GetEfiGlobalVariable2 Gerd Hoffmann
2023-02-27 15:53 ` Marvin Häuser
2023-02-28 6:12 ` Gerd Hoffmann
2023-02-28 8:47 ` Marvin Häuser [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-list from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=50ACE54B-1E92-4469-BD8F-FBC02FFEF061@posteo.de \
--to=devel@edk2.groups.io \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox