linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] module: sign with sha512 instead of sha1 by default

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]

Message-ID: <54fc582e-1da0-410d-b410-316792e3472b@leemhuis.info>
Date: Sat, 4 Jan 2025 10:43:30 +0100
From: Thorsten Leemhuis <linux@...mhuis.info>
To: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>
Cc: Petr Pavlu <petr.pavlu@...e.com>, Sami Tolvanen
 <samitolvanen@...gle.com>, Daniel Gomez <da.gomez@...sung.com>,
 linux-modules@...r.kernel.org, Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>,
 linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] module: sign with sha512 instead of sha1 by default

On 20.10.24 00:57, Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 16, 2024 at 04:18:41PM +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
>> Switch away from using sha1 for module signing by default and use the
>> more modern sha512 instead, which is what among others Arch, Fedora,
>> RHEL, and Ubuntu are currently using for their kernels.
>>
>> Sha1 has not been considered secure against well-funded opponents since
>> 2005[1]; since 2011 the NIST and other organizations furthermore
>> recommended its replacement[2]. This is why OpenSSL on RHEL9, Fedora
>> Linux 41+[3], and likely some other current and future distributions
>> reject the creation of sha1 signatures, which leads to a build error of
>> allmodconfig configurations:
>>
>>   80A20474797F0000:error:03000098:digital envelope routines:do_sigver_init:invalid digest:crypto/evp/m_sigver.c:342:
>>   make[4]: *** [.../certs/Makefile:53: certs/signing_key.pem] Error 1
>>   make[4]: *** Deleting file 'certs/signing_key.pem'
>>   make[4]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....
>>   make[3]: *** [.../scripts/Makefile.build:478: certs] Error 2
>>   make[2]: *** [.../Makefile:1936: .] Error 2
>>   make[1]: *** [.../Makefile:224: __sub-make] Error 2
>>   make[1]: Leaving directory '...'
>>   make: *** [Makefile:224: __sub-make] Error 2
>>
>> This change makes allmodconfig work again and sets a default that is
>> more appropriate for current and future users, too.
>>
>> Link: https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2005/02/cryptanalysis_o.html [1]
>> Link: https://csrc.nist.gov/projects/hash-functions [2]
>> Link: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/OpenSSLDistrustsha1SigVer [3]
>> Signed-off-by: Thorsten Leemhuis <linux@...mhuis.info>
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> Tested-by: kdevops <kdevops@...ts.linux.dev> [0]
> Links: https://github.com/linux-kdevops/linux-modules-kpd/actions/runs/11420092929/job/31775404330 # [0]
> 
> Applied and pushed!

Lo! Just wandering: what happened to that patch? That reply made me
assume that the patch was heading towards mainline, but it seems it's
not even in -next. Were there problems and it was dropped or something?

Ciao, Thorsten