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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 02 Nov 2017 18:10:41 -0400 From: Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> To: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>, mcgrof@...nel.org Cc: linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, gnomes@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk, linux-efi <linux-efi@...r.kernel.org>, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...gle.com> Subject: Re: Firmware signing -- Re: [PATCH 00/27] security, efi: Add kernel lockdown On Thu, 2017-11-02 at 22:04 +0000, David Howells wrote: > Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote: > > > > 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? > > Luis has a set of patches for this. However, I'm not sure if that's going > anywhere at the moment. Possibly I should remove this from the manpage for > the moment. Or reflect that IMA-appraisal, if enabled, will enforce firmware being validly signed. Mimi
Powered by blists - more mailing lists