[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <522F6519.4030004@zytor.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2013 11:29:45 -0700
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Matthew Garrett <matthew.garrett@...ula.com>
CC: Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@....eng.br>,
David Lang <david@...g.hm>,
"Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu" <Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"keescook@...omium.org" <keescook@...omium.org>,
"gregkh@...uxfoundation.org" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
"linux-efi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-efi@...r.kernel.org>,
"jmorris@...ei.org" <jmorris@...ei.org>,
"linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org"
<linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/12] One more attempt at useful kernel lockdown
On 09/10/2013 11:26 AM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-09-10 at 14:23 -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
>> On Tue, 10 Sep 2013, Matthew Garrett wrote:
>>> That's why modern systems require signed firmware updates.
>>
>> Linux doesn't. Is someone working on adding signature support to the
>> runtime firmware loader?
>
> It'd be simple to do so, but so far the model appears to be that devices
> that expect signed firmware enforce that themselves.
>
Most devices do absolutely no verification on the firmware, and simply
trust the driver.
So signing firmware is probably critical.
-hpa
--
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