linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 10/11] acpi: Ignore acpi_rsdp kernel parameter in a secure boot environment

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: <20120904203732.GA29508@srcf.ucam.org>
Date:	Tue, 4 Sep 2012 21:37:32 +0100
From:	Matthew Garrett <mjg@...hat.com>
To:	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc:	Shuah Khan <shuahkhan@...il.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, linux-efi@...r.kernel.org,
	Josh Boyer <jwboyer@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/11] acpi: Ignore acpi_rsdp kernel parameter in a
 secure boot environment

On Tue, Sep 04, 2012 at 09:37:42PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> > Gotta say this capability name is confusing. Naming is
> > CAP_PRE_SECURE_BOOT or something along the lines might be a better
> > choice. When I just look at this name, I sure thought this
> > CAP_SECURE_FIRMWARE true means it is a secure boot capable firmware.
> 
> Given there is nothing secure about it would it also be better to call it
> AUTHENTICATED_BOOT ?

Well, there is the question of whether the sense is correct - you'll 
only have this capability if you don't boot with any form of 
authentication. CAP_KERNEL_ACCESS?

-- 
Matthew Garrett | mjg59@...f.ucam.org
--
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/