lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [Oct]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: Fw: signed kernel modules?
From
Date
On Mon, 2004-10-11 at 16:11 +0100, David Howells wrote:
> > Sign the whole thing. Use a signature format which doesn't suck (ASN1
> > parsing in the kernel? Hmm...). Have your build system spit out two
> > RPMs, one with full debug modules, and one without. This is not rocket
> > science.
>
> You make it sound so simple...
>
> I've adapted my patches to sign the whole thing

Why on earth would you want to sign the whole thing? As you've observed,
that means the signature gets broken when the debug info is stripped,
etc. Sign just what the kernel actually _looks_ at, nothing more.

Signing the whole thing is just silly. If you're going to include random
extra irrelevant stuff like comment sections and debug info, then you
might as well include the inode number and device on which the .ko file
is stored too -- so it breaks when you 'cp' it.

> 'cos I know you're just going to fight it otherwise[*]:-)

<...>

> [*] You're still wrong, of course, but that's your prerogative:-)

That doesn't mean you have to pander to him.

--
dwmw2
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:06    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans