linux-kernel - Re: Should we automatically generate a module signing key at all?

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: <29122.1432039923@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
Date:	Tue, 19 May 2015 13:52:03 +0100
From:	David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
To:	David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>
Cc:	dhowells@...hat.com, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Michal Marek <mmarek@...e.cz>,
	Abelardo Ricart III <aricart@...nix.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@...il.com>, keyrings@...ux-nfs.org,
	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
	LSM List <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>,
	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>
Subject: Re: Should we automatically generate a module signing key at all?

David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org> wrote:

> Then when one module is loaded, we also have to pass in a table containing
> all the other sha256's. The kernel checks the sha256 of what's being loaded,
> checks it matches what's in the table that was also loaded. And then
> validates the integrity of that table.

That's basically Andy's idea with a special module containing the table.  But
unless you want to reload the table every time you load a module, you haven't
gained anything.

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/