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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.