[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Yuur2x+H5ESwJmcr@kroah.com>
Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2022 13:22:03 +0200
From: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Evgeniy Baskov <baskov@...ras.ru>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, x86@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Alexey Khoroshilov <khoroshilov@...ras.ru>,
linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/8] x86_64: Harden compressed kernel, part 1
On Thu, Aug 04, 2022 at 01:41:58PM +0300, Evgeniy Baskov wrote:
> On 2022-08-03 17:05, Dave Hansen wrote:
> >
> > That shows me that it's _possible_ to build a more strict PE loader that
> > wouldn't load Linux. But, in practice is anyone using a more strict PE
> > loader? Does anyone actually want that in practice? Or, again, is this
> > more strict PE loader just an academic demonstration?
> >
> > The README starts:
> >
> > This branch demonstrates...
> >
> > That doesn't seem like something that's _important_ to deal with.
> > Sounds like a proof-of-concept.
> >
> > Don't get me wrong, I'm all for improving thing, even if the benefits
> > are far off. But, let's not fool ourselves.
>
> We have commercial closed-source UEFI firmware implementation at ISP RAS
> that follows the behavior of the secure_pe branch. That firmware is used
> as a part of [1].
>
> [1] https://www.ispras.ru/en/technologies/asperitas/
Are there any plans on getting those changes merged back upstream to the
main UEFI codebase so that others can test this type of functionality
out?
thanks,
greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists