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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <87vcb3z1it.fsf@rustcorp.com.au> Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2013 11:00:02 +1030 From: Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au> To: Josh Boyer <jwboyer@...il.com>, Chris Samuel <chris@...muel.org> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, dhowells@...hat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] MODSIGN: Warn when sign check fails due to -ENOKEY Josh Boyer <jwboyer@...il.com> writes: > On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 4:44 AM, Chris Samuel <chris@...muel.org> wrote: >> /* Please CC me in responses, I am not subscribed to LKML */ >> >> Currently if a signature check fails on module load due to not having >> the appropriate key (-ENOKEY) and we are not doing strict checking >> there is no information provided to the user other than the lock debug >> taint warning: >> >> Disabling lock debugging due to kernel taint >> >> This patch causes a single warning to be emitted to explain why the >> kernel is being tainted, before the above taint warning occurs. >> >> Module verification failed, required key not present, tainting kernel >> >> Found whilst trying to work out why all the 3.8 development kernels >> I was building and testing were warning about taints and why all modules >> were listed as forced load (F) in /proc/modules when that wasn't the >> case in the 3.5, 3.6 or 3.7 kernels I'd tried. >> >> Signed-off-by: Christopher Samuel <chris@...muel.org> >> --- >> kernel/module.c | 4 +++- >> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/kernel/module.c b/kernel/module.c >> index 250092c..27de534 100644 >> --- a/kernel/module.c >> +++ b/kernel/module.c >> @@ -2443,8 +2443,10 @@ static int module_sig_check(struct load_info *info) >> if (err < 0 && fips_enabled) >> panic("Module verification failed with error %d in FIPS >> mode\n", >> err); >> - if (err == -ENOKEY && !sig_enforce) >> + if (err == -ENOKEY && !sig_enforce) { >> + printk_once(KERN_DEBUG "Module verification failed, required >> key not present, tainting kernel\n"); >> err = 0; >> + } >> return err; > > I'd suggest putting the printk in load_module where we call the > add_taint_module function instead. Also, you might want to make the > priority a bit higher if it's meant to be informative. Something like > KERN_INFO. Agreed. KERN_NOTICE, I think: we really want to see if someone's inserting an unsigned module! 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists