linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/3] binfmt_elf: Verify signature of signed elf binary

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: <20130121164213.GB27617@redhat.com>
Date:	Mon, 21 Jan 2013 11:42:13 -0500
From:	Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>
To:	Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc:	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, pjones@...hat.com, hpa@...or.com,
	dhowells@...hat.com, jwboyer@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] binfmt_elf: Verify signature of signed elf binary

On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 11:55:59PM -0500, Mimi Zohar wrote:

[..]
> Please remind me why you can't use IMA-appraisal, which was upstreamed
> in Linux 3.7?  Why another method is needed?

So is this IMA-appraisal also supports digital signatures? The IMA white
paper seems to put digital signatures in separate category
(IMA-Appraisal-Signature-Extension).

> 
> With IMA-appraisal, there are a couple of issues that would still need
> to be addressed:
> - missing the ability to specify the validation method required.
> - modify the ima_appraise_tcb policy policy to require elf executables
> to be digitally signed.

For my use case, all executable don't have to be digitally signed. If
something is digitally signed then do the signature verification.

Thanks
Vivek
--
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/