[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0702151530260.14458@scrub.home>
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 15:35:50 +0100 (CET)
From: Roman Zippel <zippel@...ux-m68k.org>
To: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
cc: torvalds@...l.org, akpm@...l.org, herbert.xu@...hat.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, davej@...hat.com,
arjan@...radead.org, linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] MODSIGN: Kernel module signing
Hi,
On Wed, 14 Feb 2007, David Howells wrote:
> Now, this is not a complete solution by any means: the core kernel is not
> protected, and nor are /dev/mem or /dev/kmem, but it denies (or at least
> controls) one relatively simple attack vector.
This is really the weak point - it offers no advantage over an equivalent
implementation in user space (e.g. in the module tools). So why has to be
done in the kernel?
bye, Roman
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists