lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Jun]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 00/23] Crypto keys and module signing
Date
On Mon, 4 Jun 2012 09:38:43 -0400, Josh Boyer <jwboyer@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 9:16 PM, Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au> wrote:
> > Mangling a module after it is signed is very odd, and odd things aren't
> > nice for security features.  That's how we got here; I'm trying to move
> > the oddness out of the verification path.
>
> It's unfortunate, yes. The biggest case I can think of is splitting
> the debug symbols out of the modules after they are built (David might
> have other cases). Perhaps we could upstream that as well and
> organize it such that the modules are built, split for debuginfo, and
> then signed?

That was my original suggestion. Just prepare all the module variants
at build time, and sign them all.

See: https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/12/10/16

Cheers,
Rusty.
--
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: 2012-06-05 03:41    [W:0.072 / U:0.556 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site