[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <32764.1509378584@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2017 15:49:44 +0000
From: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
To: Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: dhowells@...hat.com, joeyli <jlee@...e.com>,
linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, gnomes@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk,
linux-efi@...r.kernel.org, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, jforbes@...hat.com,
Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/27] kexec_file: Disable at runtime if securelevel has been set
Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> Huh?! With the "secure_boot" policy enabled on the boot command line,
> IMA-appraisal would verify the kexec kernel image, firmware, kernel
> modules, and custom IMA policy signatures.
What happens if the "secure_boot" policy isn't enabled on the boot command
line? Can you sum up both cases in a paragraph I can add to the patch
description?
> Other patches in this patch series need to be updated as well to check
> if IMA-appraisal is enabled.
Which exactly? I've added your "!is_ima_appraise_enabled() &&" line to
kexec_file() and module_sig_check(). Anything else?
David
Powered by blists - more mailing lists