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] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Sat, 17 Dec 2022 02:04:02 +0000
From:   Luca Boccassi <>
To:     Eric Biggers <>
        Jes Sorensen <>,
        Victor Hsieh <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fsverity: mark builtin signatures as deprecated

On Fri, 16 Dec 2022 at 20:55, Eric Biggers <> wrote:
> 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.

I'm not sure what you mean by "most users" - systemd has support for
dm-verity signatures all over the place, libcryptsetup/veritysetup
supports them, and even libmount has native first-class mount options
for them.

> > 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...

Maybe, but it's there and it's used for multiple purposes and
userspace relies on it. If you want to add a new alternative and
optional formats I don't think it would be a problem, I certainly
wouldn't mind.

Kind regards,
Luca Boccassi

Powered by blists - more mailing lists