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:   Fri, 3 Feb 2017 16:23:15 +0000
From:   Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>
To:     David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
Cc:     Matt Fleming <matt@...eblueprint.co.uk>,
        "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>,
        keyrings@...r.kernel.org,
        "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/7] efi: Print the secure boot status in x86 setup_arch()
 [ver #7]

On 3 February 2017 at 16:21, David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com> wrote:
> Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org> wrote:
>
>> > +       if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_EFI)) {
>>
>> Shouldn't this be a runtime check?
>
> Interesting question.  The original patch I was working from had a #ifdef
> here.  Possibly it doesn't need to be there at all.  We could rely entirely on
> the value of boot_params.secure_boot.
>

Yes, but only if you are booting via UEFI, no? So perhaps use
efi_enabled(EFI_BOOT) instead?

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ