From: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
To: Eric Snowberg <eric.snowberg@oracle.com>
Cc: dhowells@redhat.com, dwmw2@infradead.org,
jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com, herbert@gondor.apana.org.au,
davem@davemloft.net, jmorris@namei.org, serge@hallyn.com,
nayna@linux.ibm.com, zohar@linux.ibm.com, erichte@linux.ibm.com,
mpe@ellerman.id.au, keyrings@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org,
linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] certs: Add EFI_CERT_X509_GUID support for dbx entries
Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2020 09:49:08 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1360578.1607593748@warthog.procyon.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200916004927.64276-1-eric.snowberg@oracle.com>
Eric Snowberg <eric.snowberg@oracle.com> wrote:
> Add support for EFI_CERT_X509_GUID dbx entries. When a EFI_CERT_X509_GUID
> is found, it is added as an asymmetrical key to the .blacklist keyring.
> Anytime the .platform keyring is used, the keys in the .blacklist keyring
> are referenced, if a matching key is found, the key will be rejected.
Ummm... Why this way and not as a blacklist key which takes up less space?
I'm guessing that you're using the key chain matching logic. We really only
need to blacklist the key IDs.
Also, what should happen if a revocation cert rejected by the blacklist?
> +int mark_key_revocationlisted(const char *data, size_t size)
Hmmm... The name looks wrong, but I can see the potential issue that kernel
keys can actually be marked revoked as a separate concept. How about
add_key_to_revocation_list() and is_key_on_revocation_list().
David
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-12-10 9:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-09-16 0:49 [PATCH v4] certs: Add EFI_CERT_X509_GUID support for dbx entries Eric Snowberg
2020-09-16 0:49 ` Eric Snowberg
2020-09-16 18:09 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2020-09-16 18:09 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2020-12-10 9:49 ` David Howells [this message]
2020-12-10 18:56 ` Eric Snowberg
2021-01-12 14:57 ` David Howells
2021-01-13 20:41 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2021-01-14 0:11 ` Eric Snowberg
2021-01-15 9:15 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2021-01-15 16:49 ` Eric Snowberg
2021-01-20 11:26 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2021-01-20 22:13 ` Eric Snowberg
2021-01-21 0:36 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2021-01-27 11:46 ` David Howells
2021-01-27 14:03 ` Mimi Zohar
2021-01-27 15:41 ` Eric Snowberg
2021-01-28 4:13 ` Nayna
2021-01-30 10:24 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2021-01-29 23:27 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2021-01-12 17:10 ` David Howells
2021-01-12 19:13 ` Eric Snowberg
2021-01-15 17:21 ` James Bottomley
2021-01-15 23:01 ` Eric Snowberg
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=1360578.1607593748@warthog.procyon.org.uk \
--to=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=dwmw2@infradead.org \
--cc=eric.snowberg@oracle.com \
--cc=erichte@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=herbert@gondor.apana.org.au \
--cc=jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=jmorris@namei.org \
--cc=keyrings@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
--cc=nayna@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=serge@hallyn.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 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.