linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH] fsverity: mark builtin signatures as deprecated

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]

Message-ID: <Y5zbNtaadNGPGHQb@sol.localdomain>
Date:   Fri, 16 Dec 2022 12:55:18 -0800
From:   Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...nel.org>
To:     Luca Boccassi <bluca@...ian.org>
Cc:     linux-fscrypt@...r.kernel.org, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
        linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org,
        Jes Sorensen <jsorensen@...a.com>,
        Victor Hsieh <victorhsieh@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fsverity: mark builtin signatures as deprecated

On Thu, Dec 08, 2022 at 09:37:29PM +0000, Luca Boccassi wrote:
> 
> The second question is easy: because the kernel is the right place for
> our use case to do this verification and enforcement, exactly like dm-
> verity does.

Well, dm-verity's in-kernel signature verification support is a fairly new
feature.  Most users of dm-verity don't use it, and will not be using it.

> Userspace is largely untrusted, or much lower trust anyway.

Yes, which means the kernel is highly trusted.  Which is why parsing complex
binary formats, X.509 and PKCS#7, in C code in the kernel is not a great idea...

- Eric