linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] Load keys from signed PE binaries

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20130226034031.GA26591@kroah.com>
Date:	Mon, 25 Feb 2013 19:40:31 -0800
From:	Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:	Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>
Cc:	Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>, David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
	Florian Weimer <fw@...eb.enyo.de>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.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

On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 03:28:39AM +0000, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 10:25:08PM -0500, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 03:13:38AM +0000, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > > 
> > > Because Microsoft have indicated that they'd be taking a reactive 
> > > approach to blacklisting and because, so far, nobody has decided to 
> > > write the trivial proof of concept that demonstrates the problem.
> > 
> > Microsoft would take a severe hit both from a PR perspective, as well
> > as incurring significant legal risks if they did that in certain
> > jourisdictions --- in particular, I suspect in Europe, if Microsoft
> > were to break the ability of Linux distributions from booting, it
> > would be significantly frowned upon.
> 
> If a Linux vendor chose to knowingly breach the obligations they agreed 
> to, you don't think there'd be any PR hit?

What "vendor" is there in this case?  You released a signed shim, as did
the Linux Foundation, and lots of distros are now using it, and there
are absolutly no "orginization" behind a bunch of them.  Will your
signed shim be revoked because a random PoC was posted somewhere that
could be used with any kernel booted using it?

thanks,

greg k-h
--
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/