linux-kernel - Re: Trusted kernel patchset for Secure Boot lockdown

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: <alpine.LRH.2.02.1402281402090.26521@tundra.namei.org>
Date:	Fri, 28 Feb 2014 14:03:04 +1100 (EST)
From:	James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>
To:	Josh Boyer <jwboyer@...oraproject.org>
cc:	Matthew Garrett <matthew.garrett@...ula.com>,
	"Linux-Kernel@...r. Kernel. Org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
	Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	"linux-efi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-efi@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-security-module <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Trusted kernel patchset for Secure Boot lockdown

On Thu, 27 Feb 2014, Josh Boyer wrote:

> On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 3:11 PM, Matthew Garrett
> <matthew.garrett@...ula.com> wrote:
> > The conclusion we came to at Plumbers was that this patchset was basically
> > fine but that Linus hated the name "securelevel" more than I hate pickled
> > herring, so after thinking about this for a few months I've come up with
> > "Trusted Kernel". This flag indicates that the kernel is, via some
> > external mechanism, trusted and should behave that way. If firmware has
> > some way to verify the kernel, it can pass that information on. If userspace
> > has some way to verify the kernel, it can set the flag itself. However,
> > userspace should not attempt to use the flag as a means to verify that the
> > kernel was trusted - untrusted userspace could have set it on an untrusted
> > kernel, but by the same metric an untrusted kernel could just set it itself.
> 
> FWIW, I've been running a kernel using this patchset in place of the
> patchset Fedora typically carries for this purpose for a bit.  Things
> appear to be working as expected and the protections remain the same.
> 
> It would be really nice to get this set of patches in so some of the
> other patches that depend on them can start being pushed as well.

Ok, which tree should take this?  I'm happy to, although most of it is 
outside security/ .



-- 
James Morris
<jmorris@...ei.org>
--
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/