From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S933930Ab2KBRy2 (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Fri, 2 Nov 2012 13:54:28 -0400
Received: from cavan.codon.org.uk ([93.93.128.6]:60724 "EHLO
	cavan.codon.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S932260Ab2KBRy0 (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Fri, 2 Nov 2012 13:54:26 -0400
Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2012 17:54:16 +0000
From: Matthew Garrett <mjg59@srcf.ucam.org>
To: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>
Cc: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>, Chris Friesen <chris.friesen@genband.com>,
        Eric Paris <eparis@parisplace.org>, Jiri Kosina <jkosina@suse.cz>,
        Oliver Neukum <oneukum@suse.de>, Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
        Josh Boyer <jwboyer@gmail.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, linux-efi@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] Second attempt at kernel secure boot support
Message-ID: <20121102175416.GA11816@srcf.ucam.org>
References: <1351762703.2391.31.camel@dabdike.int.hansenpartnership.com>
 <alpine.LNX.2.00.1211011044290.6606@pobox.suse.cz>
 <1351763954.2391.37.camel@dabdike.int.hansenpartnership.com>
 <CACLa4puzLR2om6SHw3wVnfZ1nezVsKOp8+705AdHZ4_=JamYfw@mail.gmail.com>
 <20121101202701.GB20817@xo-6d-61-c0.localdomain>
 <5092E361.7080901@genband.com>
 <20121102163302.GA6080@elf.ucw.cz>
 <1351875164.2439.42.camel@dabdike.int.hansenpartnership.com>
 <20121102165456.GB9997@srcf.ucam.org>
 <1351878511.2439.44.camel@dabdike.int.hansenpartnership.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1351878511.2439.44.camel@dabdike.int.hansenpartnership.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: <locally generated>
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: mjg59@cavan.codon.org.uk
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on cavan.codon.org.uk); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Fri, Nov 02, 2012 at 05:48:31PM +0000, James Bottomley wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-11-02 at 16:54 +0000, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 02, 2012 at 04:52:44PM +0000, James Bottomley wrote:
> > 
> > > The first question is how many compromises do you need.  Without
> > > co-operation from windows, you don't get to install something in the
> > > boot system, so if you're looking for a single compromise vector, the
> > > only realistic attack is to trick the user into booting a hacked linux
> > > system from USB or DVD.
> > 
> > You run a binary. It pops up a box saying "Windows needs your permission 
> > to continue", just like almost every other Windows binary that's any 
> > use. Done.
> 
> And if all the loaders do some type of present user test on a virgin
> system, how do you propose to get that message up there?

? That's the message generated by the Windows access control mechanism 
when you run a binary that requests elevated privileges.

-- 
Matthew Garrett | mjg59@srcf.ucam.org