linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V2 2/3] integrity: Move import of MokListRT certs to a separate routine

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]

Date:   Fri, 11 Sep 2020 13:18:32 -0400
From:   Lenny Szubowicz <lszubowi@...hat.com>
To:     Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.ibm.com>, Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>
Cc:     Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-efi <linux-efi@...r.kernel.org>,
        platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, andy.shevchenko@...il.com,
        James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>, serge@...lyn.com,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        Peter Jones <pjones@...hat.com>,
        David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>, prarit@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 2/3] integrity: Move import of MokListRT certs to a
 separate routine

On 9/11/20 11:59 AM, Mimi Zohar wrote:
> On Fri, 2020-09-11 at 11:54 -0400, Lenny Szubowicz wrote:
>> On 9/11/20 11:02 AM, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>>> On Sat, 5 Sep 2020 at 04:31, Lenny Szubowicz <lszubowi@...hat.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Move the loading of certs from the UEFI MokListRT into a separate
>>>> routine to facilitate additional MokList functionality.
>>>>
>>>> There is no visible functional change as a result of this patch.
>>>> Although the UEFI dbx certs are now loaded before the MokList certs,
>>>> they are loaded onto different key rings. So the order of the keys
>>>> on their respective key rings is the same.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Lenny Szubowicz <lszubowi@...hat.com>
>>>
>>> Why did you drop Mimi's reviewed-by from this patch?
>>
>> It was not intentional. I was just not aware that I needed to propagate
>> Mimi Zohar's reviewed-by from V1 of the patch to V2.
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.ibm.com>
>>
>> V2 includes changes in that patch to incorporate suggestions from
>> Andy Shevchenko. My assumption was that the maintainer would
>> gather up the reviewed-by and add any signed-off-by as appropriate,
>> but it sounds like my assumption was incorrect. In retrospect, I
>> could see that having the maintainer dig through prior versions
>> of a patch set for prior reviewed-by tags could be burdensome.
> 
> As much as possible moving code should be done without making changes,
> simpler for code review.   Then as a separate patch you make changes.
> That way you could also have retained my Reviewed-by.
> 
> Mimi

If you or Ard think I should, I can do a V3 with:

   Patch V3 01: Unchanged from V2
   Patch V3 02: Goes back to V1 of patch 02 that Mimi reviewed
   Patch V3 03: New. Has Andy's cleanup suggestions separated from patch 02
   Patch V3 04: This would most probably just be the V2 of patch 03 with no changes

                  -Lenny.

> 
>>
>> Advice on the expected handling of this would be appreciated.
> 
>