[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <F6980CA4-737D-416A-BBE3-390CEBA8B192@oracle.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2021 18:26:43 -0700
From: Eric Snowberg <eric.snowberg@...cle.com>
To: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
Cc: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@...nel.org>,
Mickaël Salaün <mic@...ux.microsoft.com>,
David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
keyrings@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cert: Add kconfig dependency for validate_trust
> On Feb 23, 2021, at 4:47 PM, David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> Eric Snowberg <eric.snowberg@...cle.com> wrote:
>
>> The kernel test robot reports when building with Kconfig
>> CONFIG_INTEGRITY_PLATFORM_KEYRING defined and
>> CONFIG_SYSTEM_DATA_VERIFICATION undefined:
>>
>> ld.lld: error: undefined symbol: pkcs7_validate_trust
>> referenced by blacklist.c:128 (certs/blacklist.c:128)
>> blacklist.o:(is_key_on_revocation_list) in archive certs/built-in.a
>>
>> Make CONFIG_SYSTEM_DATA_VERIFICATION a dependency for validate_trust.
>>
>> Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@...el.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Eric Snowberg <eric.snowberg@...cle.com>
>
> I wonder if it's better to provide a separate config option for the revocation
> list, say:
>
> config SYSTEM_REVOCATION_LIST
> bool "Add revocation certs to the blacklist keyring"
> depends on SYSTEM_BLACKLIST_KEYRING
> depends on PKCS7_MESSAGE_PARSER
> help
> ...
>
> and use that in blacklist.c.
>
> In keys/system_keyring.h, is_key_on_revocation_list() can then be defaulted to
> return 0 if that is disabled.
I tried something like that in the past. The problem I ran into is someone
could create a config with PKCS7_MESSAGE_PARSER=m. Then pkcs7_validate_trust
would give an undefined reference error.
SYSTEM_DATA_VERIFICATION was the only thing I could find that guaranteed
everything was available. I supposed I could do:
config SYSTEM_REVOCATION_LIST
bool "Add revocation certs to the blacklist keyring"
depends on SYSTEM_BLACKLIST_KEYRING
depends on SYSTEM_DATA_VERIFICATION
help
…
Would you rather I do that instead?
> Btw, I've just noticed that add_key_to_revocation_list() and
> is_key_on_revocation_list() lack kernel doc comments.
I’ll prepare a patch to add the kernel-doc comments.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists