linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@kernel.org>
To: Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com>
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, 5 Feb 2019 13:13:37 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190205211337.GX11489@garbanzo.do-not-panic.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1549369479.4146.142.camel@linux.ibm.com>

On Tue, Feb 05, 2019 at 07:24:39AM -0500, Mimi Zohar wrote:
> 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.

I don't see why wait.

> For now, other than updating the comment, would you be willing to add
> your Review/Ack to this patch?

But I don't particularly like the changes, I still believe trying to
LSM'ify kernel module signing would be a better start to help with
long term maintenace on this code.

Also, do we have selftests implemented to ensure we don't regress with
your changes?

  Luis

  reply	other threads:[~2019-02-05 21:13 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
2019-02-05 21:13           ` Luis Chamberlain [this message]
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=20190205211337.GX11489@garbanzo.do-not-panic.com \
    --to=mcgrof@kernel.org \
    --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=mjg59@google.com \
    --cc=seth.forshee@canonical.com \
    --cc=zohar@linux.ibm.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).