linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 00/27] security, efi: Add kernel lockdown

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: <1509660086.3416.15.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date:   Thu, 02 Nov 2017 18:01:26 -0400
From:   Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:     David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
        linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     gnomes@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk, linux-efi@...r.kernel.org,
        matthew.garrett@...ula.com, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, jforbes@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/27] security, efi: Add kernel lockdown

Hi David,

>From the man page:

> Only validly signed modules may be loaded.
> .P
> Only validly signed binaries may be kexec'd.
> .P
> Only validly signed device firmware may be loaded.

fw_get_filesystem_firmware() calls kernel_read_file_from_path() to
read the firmware, which calls into the security hooks. Is there
another place that validates the firmware signatures.  I'm not seeing
which patch requires firmware to be signed?

Mimi