linux-kernel - Re: RFC: sign the modules at install time

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: <87bofvjse0.fsf@rustcorp.com.au>
Date:	Mon, 22 Oct 2012 10:21:35 +1030
From:	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
To:	David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
Cc:	dhowells@...hat.com,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Josh Boyer <jwboyer@...hat.com>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	pjones@...hat.com
Subject: Re: RFC: sign the modules at install time

David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com> writes:
> Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au> wrote:
>
>> > (Side note: I hope people realize that the random key is generated
>> > with a 100-year lifespan. So if you build a kernel today, you do
>> > potentially have a "year-2112 problem". I'm not horribly worried, but
>> > I *am* a bit worried about 32-bit time_t overflow and I hope 32-bit
>> > openssl doesn't do anything odd)
>> 
>> Yep, David's original patch had that problem; he fixed the kernel's x509
>> handling to use struct tm, not time_t, and now it Just Works.
>
> That's assuming that 32-bit *openssl* gets it right when generating the key.

Yes, I am assuming that.  What openssl did you think I ran on my 32-bit
kernel? :)

Cheers,
Rusty.
--
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/