[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <94fe39a9-db9e-211d-d9b7-4cfe1a270e6f@linux.microsoft.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2020 11:21:28 -0800
From: Lakshmi Ramasubramanian <nramas@...ux.microsoft.com>
To: Nayna Jain <nayna@...ux.ibm.com>, linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org,
linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-efi@...r.kernel.org,
linux-s390@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>,
Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>,
Philipp Rudo <prudo@...ux.ibm.com>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>, zohar@...ux.ibm.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ima: add a new CONFIG for loading arch-specific policies
Hi Nayna,
> +
> +config IMA_SECURE_AND_OR_TRUSTED_BOOT
> + bool
> + depends on IMA
> + depends on IMA_ARCH_POLICY
> + default n
> + help
> + This option is selected by architectures to enable secure and/or
> + trusted boot based on IMA runtime policies.
>
Why is the default for this new config "n"?
Is there any reason to not turn on this config if both IMA and
IMA_ARCH_POLICY are set to y?
thanks,
-lakshmi
Powered by blists - more mailing lists