From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.2 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5220DC433FF for ; Thu, 8 Aug 2019 22:46:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D7332166E for ; Thu, 8 Aug 2019 22:46:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2404581AbfHHWnS (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Aug 2019 18:43:18 -0400 Received: from namei.org ([65.99.196.166]:39598 "EHLO namei.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1732938AbfHHWnR (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Aug 2019 18:43:17 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by namei.org (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id x78Mh5V0015311; Thu, 8 Aug 2019 22:43:05 GMT Date: Fri, 9 Aug 2019 08:43:05 +1000 (AEST) From: James Morris To: Matthew Garrett cc: Jessica Yu , LSM List , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Linux API , David Howells , Kees Cook Subject: Re: [PATCH V37 04/29] Enforce module signatures if the kernel is locked down In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <20190731221617.234725-1-matthewgarrett@google.com> <20190731221617.234725-5-matthewgarrett@google.com> <20190801142157.GA5834@linux-8ccs> <20190808100059.GA30260@linux-8ccs> User-Agent: Alpine 2.21 (LRH 202 2017-01-01) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 8 Aug 2019, Matthew Garrett wrote: > On Thu, Aug 8, 2019 at 3:01 AM Jessica Yu wrote: > > If you're confident that a hard dependency is not the right approach, > > then perhaps we could add a comment in the Kconfig (You could take a > > look at the comment under MODULE_SIG_ALL in init/Kconfig for an > > example)? If someone is configuring the kernel on their own then it'd > > be nice to let them know, otherwise having a lockdown kernel without > > module signatures would defeat the purpose of lockdown no? :-) > > James, what would your preference be here? Jessica is right that not > having CONFIG_MODULE_SIG enabled means lockdown probably doesn't work > as expected, but tying it to the lockdown LSM seems inappropriate when > another LSM could be providing lockdown policy and run into the same > issue. Should this just be mentioned in the CONFIG_MODULE_SIG Kconfig > help? I agree and yes mention it in the help. A respin of just this patch is fine. -- James Morris