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, 13 Mar 2018 10:18:35 -0700
From:   James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>
To:     "Lee, Chun-Yi" <joeyli.kernel@...il.com>,
        David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
Cc:     linux-fs@...r.kernel.org, linux-efi@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, "Lee, Chun-Yi" <jlee@...e.com>,
        Josh Boyer <jwboyer@...oraproject.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] MODSIGN: checking the blacklisted hash before
 loading a kernel module

On Tue, 2018-03-13 at 18:38 +0800, Lee, Chun-Yi wrote:
> This patch adds the logic for checking the kernel module's hash
> base on blacklist. The hash must be generated by sha256 and enrolled
> to dbx/mokx.
> 
> For example:
> 	sha256sum sample.ko
> 	mokutil --mokx --import-hash $HASH_RESULT
> 
> Whether the signature on ko file is stripped or not, the hash can be
> compared by kernel.

What's the use case for this?  We're already in trouble from the ODMs
for the size of dbx and its consumption of the extremely limited
variable space, so do we really have a use case for adding module
blacklist hashes to the UEFI variables given the space constraints (as
in one we can't do any other way)?

James

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ