From: Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com>
To: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org,
linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jessica Yu <jeyu@kernel.org>,
David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
Seth Forshee <seth.forshee@canonical.com>,
Justin Forbes <jforbes@redhat.com>,
Matthew Garrett <mjg59@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/ima: require signed kernel modules
Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2019 07:24:39 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1549369479.4146.142.camel@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190204223026.GR11489@garbanzo.do-not-panic.com>
On Mon, 2019-02-04 at 14:30 -0800, Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 04, 2019 at 05:05:10PM -0500, Mimi Zohar wrote:
> > On Mon, 2019-02-04 at 12:38 -0800, Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> > I don't see a need for an additional LSM just for verifying kernel
> > module signatures.
>
> But it is one, module signing was just spawned pre the boom of LSMs.
>
> I do believe that treating the code as such would help with its reading
> and long term maintenance.
>
> Anyway, I had to try to convince you.
Perhaps, after IMA supports appended signatures (for kernel modules),
I could see making the existing kernel module appended signature
verification an LSM.
For now, other than updating the comment, would you be willing to add
your Review/Ack to this patch?
Mimi
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-02-05 12:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-01-31 19:18 [PATCH] ima: requiring signed kernel modules Mimi Zohar
2019-01-31 19:18 ` [PATCH] x86/ima: require " Mimi Zohar
2019-02-04 20:38 ` Luis Chamberlain
2019-02-04 22:05 ` Mimi Zohar
2019-02-04 22:30 ` Luis Chamberlain
2019-02-05 12:24 ` Mimi Zohar [this message]
2019-02-05 21:13 ` Luis Chamberlain
2019-02-05 23:13 ` Mimi Zohar
2019-02-05 15:18 ` Seth Forshee
2019-02-05 16:47 ` Mimi Zohar
2019-02-05 18:32 ` Seth Forshee
2019-02-05 18:52 ` Mimi Zohar
2019-02-08 19:21 ` Seth Forshee
2019-02-10 15:39 ` Mimi Zohar
2019-02-05 16:10 ` Nayna
2019-02-11 15:56 ` Jessica Yu
2019-02-11 16:19 ` Mimi Zohar
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-all 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=1549369479.4146.142.camel@linux.ibm.com \
--to=zohar@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=jeyu@kernel.org \
--cc=jforbes@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mcgrof@kernel.org \
--cc=mjg59@google.com \
--cc=seth.forshee@canonical.com \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).