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 S1754505AbdLGPdA (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Thu, 7 Dec 2017 10:33:00 -0500
Received: from www.llwyncelyn.cymru ([82.70.14.225]:57016 "EHLO fuzix.org"
        rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
        id S1753308AbdLGPc6 (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Thu, 7 Dec 2017 10:32:58 -0500
Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2017 15:32:09 +0000
From: Alan Cox <gnomes@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@kernel.org>
Cc: "AKASHI, Takahiro" <takahiro.akashi@linaro.org>,
        Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Jan Blunck <jblunck@infradead.org>,
        Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@lip6.fr>,
        David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
        Marcus Meissner <meissner@suse.de>, Gary Lin <GLin@suse.com>,
        linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-efi <linux-efi@vger.kernel.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Matthew Garrett <mjg59@google.com>
Subject: Re: Firmware signing -- Re: [PATCH 00/27] security, efi: Add kernel
 lockdown
Message-ID: <20171207153209.5da771a9@alans-desktop>
In-Reply-To: <20171204195155.GU729@wotan.suse.de>
References: <1509660641.3416.24.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
        <20171107230700.GJ22894@wotan.suse.de>
        <20171108061551.GD7859@linaro.org>
        <20171108194626.GQ22894@wotan.suse.de>
        <20171109014841.GF7859@linaro.org>
        <1510193857.4484.95.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
        <20171109044619.GG7859@linaro.org>
        <20171111023240.2398ca55@alans-desktop>
        <20171113174250.GA22894@wotan.suse.de>
        <20171113210848.4dc344bd@alans-desktop>
        <20171204195155.GU729@wotan.suse.de>
Organization: Intel Corporation
X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.15.1-dirty (GTK+ 2.24.31; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Archived-At: <https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20171207153209.5da771a9@alans-desktop/>
List-Archive: <https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/>
List-Post: <mailto:linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>

> I am curious though, is the above notion of having hardware require signed
> firmware an implication brought down by UEFI? If so do you have any pointers
> to where this is stipulated? Or is it just a best practice we assume some
> manufacturers are implementing?

It's a mix of best practice and meeting the so called 'secure boot'
requirements. In the non Linux space exactly the same problems exist in
terms of trusting devices and firmware, building a root of trust and even
more so when producing 'hardened' platforms.

Some stuff isn't - USB devices for example don't get to pee on random
memory so often isn't signed.

Alan