[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <885f1b81-6141-a3be-1dc0-92c1fc825e3c@infradead.org>
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 07:56:29 -0700
From: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>
To: list.lkml.keyrings@...benboeckel.net,
"Lee, Chun-Yi" <joeyli.kernel@...il.com>
Cc: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
"David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, keyrings@...r.kernel.org,
linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
"Lee, Chun-Yi" <jlee@...e.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/2] PKCS#7: Check codeSigning EKU for kernel module
and kexec pe verification
On 10/20/20 6:42 AM, Ben Boeckel wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 14:50:01 +0800, Lee, Chun-Yi wrote:
>> +config CHECK_CODESIGN_EKU
>> + bool "Check codeSigning extended key usage"
>> + depends on PKCS7_MESSAGE_PARSER=y
>> + depends on SYSTEM_DATA_VERIFICATION
>> + help
>> + This option provides support for checking the codeSigning extended
>> + key usage extension when verifying the signature in PKCS#7. It
extended ... extension.
Can we drop one of those or reword it?
>> + affects kernel module verification and kexec PE binary verification
>> + now.
>
> Is the "now" necessary? Isn't it implied by the option's existence?
--
~Randy
Powered by blists - more mailing lists