[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <567.1361470653@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2013 18:17:33 +0000
From: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: dhowells@...hat.com, Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>,
Josh Boyer <jwboyer@...hat.com>,
Peter Jones <pjones@...hat.com>,
Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, keyrings@...ux-nfs.org,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] Load keys from signed PE binaries
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> > There's only one signing authority, and they only sign PE binaries.
>
> If Red Hat wants to deep-throat Microsoft, that's *your* issue. That
> has nothing what-so-ever to do with the kernel I maintain. It's
> trivial for you guys to have a signing machine that parses the PE
> binary, verifies the signatures, and signs the resulting keys with
> your own key. You already wrote the code, for chissake, it's in that
> f*cking pull request.
There's a problem with your idea.
(1) Microsoft's revocation certificates would be based on the hash of the PE
binary, not the key.
(2) Re-signing would make the keys then dependent on our master key rather
than directly on Microsoft's. Microsoft's revocation certificates[*]
would then be useless.
(3) The only way Microsoft could then revoke the extra keys would be to
revoke our *master* key.
[*] Assuming of course we add support for these.
David
--
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