linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 01/24] Add the ability to lock down access to the running kernel image

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: <CA+55aFyEaNGLoSL2SJZkcvApPJQFo1mK9KW6g-_FdAm1KSqGEw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 12 Apr 2018 09:52:54 -0700
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     Justin Forbes <jmforbes@...uxtx.org>
Cc:     Jordan Glover <Golden_Miller83@...tonmail.ch>,
        David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
        linux-man <linux-man@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
        James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        LSM List <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/24] Add the ability to lock down access to the running
 kernel image

On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 6:09 AM, Justin Forbes <jmforbes@...uxtx.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 11, 2018, 5:38 PM Linus Torvalds
> <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
>>
>> So it's really the whole claim that distributions have been running
>> for this for the last five years that I wonder about, and how often
>> people end up being told: "just disable secure boot":.
>
> Very rarely in my experience.

Good. Do you have a handle on the reasons?

Because I'm assuming it's not /dev/{mem,kmem,port}? Because I'd really
be happier if we just say "those are legacy, don't enable them at all
for modern distros".

That way they'd _stay_ disabled even if somebody cannot handle the
other limitations, like DMA etc.

                 Linus