[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1552052377.4134.23.camel@linux.ibm.com>
Date: Fri, 08 Mar 2019 08:39:37 -0500
From: Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.ibm.com>
To: Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...gle.com>
Cc: Justin Forbes <jforbes@...hat.com>,
linux-integrity <linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org>,
LSM List <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-efi <linux-efi@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
Seth Forshee <seth.forshee@...onical.com>,
kexec@...ts.infradead.org, Nayna Jain <nayna@...ux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] x86/ima: retry detecting secure boot mode
On Thu, 2019-03-07 at 14:50 -0800, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 7, 2019 at 2:48 PM Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.ibm.com> wrote:
> > I added this last attempt because I'm seeing this on my laptop, with
> > some older, buggy firmware.
>
> Is the issue that it gives incorrect results on the first read, or is
> the issue that it gives incorrect results before ExitBootServices() is
> called? If the former then we should read twice in the boot stub, if
> the latter then we should figure out a way to do this immediately
> after ExitBootServices() instead.
Detecting the secure boot mode isn't the problem. On boot, I am
seeing "EFI stub: UEFI Secure Boot is enabled", but setup_arch() emits
"Secure boot could not be determined".
In efi_main() the secure_boot mode is initially unset, so
efi_get_secureboot() is called. efi_get_secureboot() returns the
secure_boot mode correctly as enabled. The problem seems to be in
saving the secure_boot mode for later use.
Mimi
Powered by blists - more mailing lists