[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <h6jeu3yf33p2ngcvaczjrghm3hunkjf5gq462njghryyc2qeph@jdug44kw6tpb>
Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2025 08:33:33 +0800
From: Coiby Xu <coxu@...hat.com>
To: Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.ibm.com>, 
	Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@...weicloud.com>
Cc: linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org, 
	Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>, Karel Srot <ksrot@...hat.com>, 
	Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@...wei.com>, Dmitry Kasatkin <dmitry.kasatkin@...il.com>, 
	Eric Snowberg <eric.snowberg@...cle.com>, Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>, 
	James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>, "Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>, 
	"open list:SECURITY SUBSYSTEM" <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>, open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ima: Fall back to default kernel module signature
 verification
On Mon, Oct 20, 2025 at 09:57:19AM -0400, Mimi Zohar wrote:
>On Mon, 2025-10-20 at 14:45 +0200, Roberto Sassu wrote:
>> On Mon, 2025-10-20 at 08:21 -0400, Mimi Zohar wrote:
[...]
>> >
>> > >
>> > > Another thought is to make CPIO support xattr. Today I realize that
>> > > ima_policy=secure_boot can also cause failure of loading kdump kernel.
>> > > So the issue this patch tries to resolves has much less impact than I
>> > > thought. Maybe we can wait until CPIO xattr support is ready? I'll help
>> > > review and test Roberto's patches if this is the best way forward.
>> >
>> > I'm not sure of the status of the CPIO patch set.  Roberto?
>>
>> I haven't had time to look at it recently. I can take the openEuler
>> version, address the remaining comments and repost.
>
>Thank you!
+1, I'm looking forward to the reposted patch set!
-- 
Best regards,
Coiby
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
 
