linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] Kernel lockdown for secure boot

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.20.1710262116270.27877@localhost>
Date:   Thu, 26 Oct 2017 21:20:47 +0200 (CEST)
From:   James Morris <james.l.morris@...cle.com>
To:     David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
cc:     jmorris@...ei.org, gnomes@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk,
        linux-efi@...r.kernel.org, mjg59@...gle.com,
        gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        jforbes@...hat.com, linux-man@...r.kernel.org, jlee@...e.com,
        linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] Kernel lockdown for secure boot

On Thu, 26 Oct 2017, David Howells wrote:

> Hi James,
> 
> Can you pull this patchset into security/next please?
> 
> It adds kernel lockdown support for EFI secure boot.  Note that it doesn't yet
> cover:
> 
> 	bpf	- No agreement as to how
> 	ftrace	- Recently suggested, query sent to maintainer
> 	perf	- Not looked at yet.

How useful is this really if it's incomplete?

And I think it really needs more testing in -next.


-- 
James Morris
<james.l.morris@...cle.com>