linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/2] efi: Enhance capsule loader to support signed Quark images

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:   Tue, 28 Feb 2017 15:36:38 +0200
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To:     Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>
Cc:     Matt Fleming <matt@...eblueprint.co.uk>,
        Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@...mens.com>,
        "Kweh, Hock Leong" <hock.leong.kweh@...el.com>,
        "Bryan O'Donoghue" <pure.logic@...us-software.ie>,
        "linux-efi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-efi@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        "Ong, Boon Leong" <boon.leong.ong@...el.com>,
        "Mok, Tze Siong" <tze.siong.mok@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] efi: Enhance capsule loader to support signed Quark images

On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 3:35 PM, Andy Shevchenko
<andy.shevchenko@...il.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 3:25 PM, Ard Biesheuvel
> <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org> wrote:
>> On 28 February 2017 at 12:29, Matt Fleming <matt@...eblueprint.co.uk> wrote:
>>> On Tue, 28 Feb, at 01:20:25PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>
>> As I said before, I'd be ok with it if we select it compile time,
>> i.e., no runtime logic that infers whether we are running on such a
>> system or not, and no carrying both implementations in all kernels
>> that have capsule loading built in.
>
> Actually it most likely that Quark kernel (kernel compiled to be run
> on Quark) will be ever used on the rest of (modern) x86 since it's
> 486+ architecture (kernel has specific option for it, 586TSC).

+ it's UP only!

> So, we might just be dependent or chosen by Quark.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko