[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CACVXFVMBq7PwOH_CwETW-uFrYL5sR9ChtOrpSOqhWWchC06HWQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2012 15:30:57 +0800
From: Ming Lei <tom.leiming@...il.com>
To: Li Joey <jlee@...ell.com>
Cc: Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de>,
Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>,
Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>, joeyli <jlee@...e.com>,
Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>,
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, linux-efi@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 0/4] Add firmware signature file check
On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 1:36 PM, Li Joey <jlee@...ell.com> wrote:
> The udev direct write firmware through data attribute, maybe we can do the
> same signature verification in firmware_data_write? The following patch
> didn't test yet.
> @@ -655,6 +656,23 @@ static ssize_t firmware_data_write(struct file *filp,
> struct kobject *kobj,
> }
>
> buf->size = max_t(size_t, offset, buf->size);
> +
> +#ifdef CONFIG_FIRMWARE_SIG
> + for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(fw_path); i++) {
> + snprintf(path, PATH_MAX, "%s/%s.sig", fw_path[i],
> buf->fw_id);
> + if (verify_signature(buf, path))
> + success = true;
> + }
When direct loading failed, it means that the firmware isn't
under the default search path, so the above verification
might return false always.
Thanks,
--
Ming Lei
--
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