[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LRH.2.21.1910160914090.11167@namei.org>
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2019 09:15:39 +1100 (AEDT)
From: James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>
To: James Morse <james.morse@....com>
cc: prsriva <prsriva@...ux.microsoft.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org, kexec@...ts.infradead.org,
mark.rutland@....com, jean-philippe@...aro.org, arnd@...db.de,
takahiro.akashi@...aro.org, sboyd@...nel.org,
catalin.marinas@....com, zohar@...ux.ibm.com,
yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com, duwe@....de, bauerman@...ux.ibm.com,
tglx@...utronix.de, allison@...utok.net, ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 0/2] Add support for arm64 to carry ima measurement
On Tue, 15 Oct 2019, James Morse wrote:
> > The IMA logs are event logs for module load time signature validation(based on policies)
> > which are backed by the TPM. No SecureBoot information is present in the log other than
> > the boot aggregate.
>
> Okay, so SecureBoot is optional with this thing.
Correct. Verified boot is one alternative.
--
James Morris
<jmorris@...ei.org>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists