linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 5/7] efi: Get the secure boot status [ver #3]

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: <5143.1480089551@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
Date:   Fri, 25 Nov 2016 15:59:11 +0000
From:   David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
To:     Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>
Cc:     dhowells@...hat.com,
        James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senpartnership.com>,
        "linux-efi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-efi@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-security-module <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>,
        Lukas Wunner <lukas@...ner.de>, keyrings@...r.kernel.org,
        "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/7] efi: Get the secure boot status [ver #3]

Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org> wrote:

> > +               if (val != 1)
> > +                       return 0;
> 
> val == 0 is better imo, since that will prevent unexpected values from
> being interpreted as 'secure boot disabled'

I've made that change.

David