Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Mon, 11 Jun 2012 11:30:33 +0300 | | Subject | Re: [PATCH 00/23] Crypto keys and module signing | | From | "Kasatkin, Dmitry" <> |
| |
On Sun, Jun 10, 2012 at 8:47 AM, Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au> wrote: > On Tue, 05 Jun 2012 14:35:56 +0100, David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com> wrote: >> Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au> wrote: >> >> > > If you prefer to have userspace extract the module signature and pass it in >> > > uargs, here's a tree that will do that: >> > > >> > > http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/dhowells/linux-modsign.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/modsign-uarg >> > >> > OK, there's merit in this approach: it certainly moves the argument >> > about how to encode the signature out of my backyard :) >> >> Not really. The signature still has to be created by the kernel build. It's >> just that you no longer have to care about the trade off when it comes to >> parsing it. > > Yes, exactly. > >> > Should we just bite the bullet and create a new syscall: >> > >> > SYSCALL_DEFINE5(init_module2, void __user *, umod, >> > unsigned long, len, const char __user *, uargs, >> > unsigned int, siglen, const char __user *, sig) >> > >> > But I'm easily swayed if you prefer the current approach. >> >> "The current approach" being to attach signature to the blob? Or to pass the >> signature separately but in the uargs? > > The former. > >> I would very much prefer to keep the signature in the blob and have the kernel >> extract it as there's no particular need for it to be detached - even if you >> are using IMA. >> >> However, I don't think an extra syscall would hurt particularly - except that >> it uses up more space in the syscall table... It would, however, be smaller >> in the signature verification department as the signature neither needs >> decoding from uargs nor extracting from the blob. > > Good. Let's have init_module2(), and let userspace decide where to get > the signature from. >
Nice.
> Thanks, > Rusty. > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-security-module" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html -- 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/
|  |