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]
Date:	Thu, 21 May 2015 08:41:02 +0300
From:	Petko Manolov <petkan@...-labs.com>
To:	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:	One Thousand Gnomes <gnomes@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
	Seth Forshee <seth.forshee@...onical.com>,
	"Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...e.com>,
	linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, james.l.morris@...cle.com,
	serge@...lyn.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org,
	David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
	Kyle McMartin <kyle@...nel.org>,
	David Woodhouse <david.woodhouse@...el.com>,
	Joey Lee <jlee@...e.de>, Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
	zohar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, mricon@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [RFD] linux-firmware key arrangement for firmware signing

On 15-05-20 21:41:04, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 07:46:13PM +0300, Petko Manolov wrote:
> > On 15-05-20 17:24:46, One Thousand Gnomes wrote:
> > > 
> > > More to the point why do you want to sign firmware files ? Leaving aside the 
> > > fact that someone will produce a device with GPLv3 firmware just to p*ss you 
> > > off there's the rather more relevant fact that firmware for devices on a so 
> > > called "trusted" platform already have signed firmware.
> > 
> > For "trusted" systems one would like to make sure everything that goes in has 
> > known provenance.  Maybe this was the idea?
> 
> If so, then just do what people do today, verify their known valid disk image 
> before mounting it and then they know they can trust the data on it to be use 
> for whatever (including firmware.)  No kernel changes needed, distro support 
> is already there for this.

I do agree, the infrastructure is already in place.  The project i am working on 
has very strict security requirements, quite unlike regular Linux box.  I was 
pleasantly surprised that it didn't take much kernel hacking to get to the point 
where stuff is working to our liking.

> I too don't understand this need to sign something that you don't really know 
> what it is from some other company, just to send it to a separate device that 
> is going to do whatever it wants with it if it is signed or not.

This is not the point.  What you need to know is _where_ the firmware came from, 
not _what_ it does once it reach your system.  If you don't care about such 
things, just ignore the signature. :)


		Petko
--
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

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ