[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200428063522.GA990431@kroah.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2020 08:35:22 +0200
From: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Tianjia Zhang <tianjia.zhang@...ux.alibaba.com>
Cc: jeyu@...nel.org, corbet@....net, rdunlap@...radead.org,
mchehab+samsung@...nel.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, pawan.kumar.gupta@...ux.intel.com,
jgross@...e.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] module: Allow to disable modsign in kernel cmdline
On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 02:00:08PM +0800, Tianjia Zhang wrote:
> This option allows to disable modsign completely at the beginning,
> and turn off by set the kernel cmdline `no_modsig_enforce` when
> `CONFIG_MODULE_SIG_FORCE` is enabled.
>
> Yet another change allows to always show the current status of
> modsign through `/sys/module/module/parameters/sig_enforce`.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jia Zhang <zhang.jia@...ux.alibaba.com>
> Signed-off-by: Tianjia Zhang <tianjia.zhang@...ux.alibaba.com>
> ---
>
> v3 change:
> Beautify the document description according to the recommendation.
>
> v2 change:
> document this new option.
>
> Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt | 6 ++++++
> kernel/module.c | 8 ++++++++
> 2 files changed, 14 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt b/Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt
> index 7bc83f3d9bdf..b30f013fb8c5 100644
> --- a/Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt
> @@ -3190,6 +3190,12 @@
> noirqdebug [X86-32] Disables the code which attempts to detect and
> disable unhandled interrupt sources.
>
> + no_modsig_enforce
> + [KNL] When CONFIG_MODULE_SIG_FORCE is set, this option
> + allows to disable modsign completely at the beginning.
> + This means that modules without (valid) signatures will
> + be loaded successfully.
> +
So now we have module.sig_enforce and this one? That feels really
confusing, why can't you just use the existing option?
And why would you want to allow the bootloader to override a kernel
build option like this? That feels risky.
thanks,
greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists