From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758167Ab3BYOdR (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 Feb 2013 09:33:17 -0500 Received: from ka.mail.enyo.de ([87.106.162.201]:35800 "EHLO ka.mail.enyo.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755982Ab3BYOdQ (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 Feb 2013 09:33:16 -0500 From: Florian Weimer To: Matthew Garrett Cc: David Howells , Linus Torvalds , Josh Boyer , Peter Jones , Vivek Goyal , Kees Cook , keyrings@linux-nfs.org, Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] Load keys from signed PE binaries References: <30665.1361461678@warthog.procyon.org.uk> <20130221164244.GA19625@srcf.ucam.org> <567.1361470653@warthog.procyon.org.uk> <20130221182511.GA22156@srcf.ucam.org> Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2013 15:33:12 +0100 In-Reply-To: <20130221182511.GA22156@srcf.ucam.org> (Matthew Garrett's message of "Thu, 21 Feb 2013 18:25:11 +0000") Message-ID: <878v6c79av.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Matthew Garrett: > I don't think that's a problem. Just put the original binary hash in the > certificate before signing it, and extend the X.509 parser to refuse > certificates that have a tag that's present in dbx. Why would Microsoft put a hash of something into dbx which they haven't signed? Wouldn't this make them subject to a denial-of-service attack on their platform if they revoke something with surprising consequences?