linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4a 1/2] selftests/kexec: make tests independent of IMA being enabled

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Mon, 25 Mar 2019 16:37:16 -0400
From:   Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.ibm.com>
To:     Dave Young <dyoung@...hat.com>
Cc:     linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
        kexec@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Petr Vorel <pvorel@...e.cz>, Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4a 1/2] selftests/kexec: make tests independent of IMA
 being enabled

On Mon, 2019-03-25 at 16:09 +0800, Dave Young wrote:
> Hi Mimi
> On 03/22/19 at 03:35pm, Mimi Zohar wrote:
> > Verify IMA is enabled before failing tests or emitting irrelevant
> > messages.  Also, don't skip the test if signatures are not required.
> > 
> > Suggested-by: Dave Young <dyoung@...hat.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.ibm.com>
> > ---
> > Dave, if this patch resolves the outstanding issues, I can fold these
> > changes into the original patches. (Reminder, these patches will need to
> > be updated to support the "lockdown" patch set.)
> 
> They looks good to me, thanks for the update

I've folded the kexec_file_load changes into the kexec_file_load test.
 The remaining kexec_load change is left as a separate patch, since it
is dependent on the ikconfig change.

> Feel free to add my reviewed-by, I did some tests although not cover all
> ima cases.

Thanks!  Is this meant as a general "reviewed-by" for all of the
patches or just this specific one?

Mimi