lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Feb]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: [RFC PATCH] Fix: module signature vs tracepoints: add new TAINT_UNSIGNED_MODULE
Date
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> writes:
> On Thu, 13 Feb 2014 13:54:42 +1030
> Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au> wrote:
>
>
>> I'm ambivalent towards out-of-tree modules, so not tempted unless I see
>> a bug report indicating a concrete problem. Then we can discuss...
>
> As I replied in another email, this is a concrete problem, and affects
> in-tree kernel modules.
>
> If you have the following in your .config:
>
> CONFIG_MODULE_SIG=y
> # CONFIG_MODULE_SIG_FORCE is not set
> # CONFIG_MODULE_SIG_ALL is not set

This means you've set the "I will arrange my own module signing" config
option:

Sign all modules during make modules_install. Without this option,
modules must be signed manually, using the scripts/sign-file tool.

comment "Do not forget to sign required modules with scripts/sign-file"
depends on MODULE_SIG_FORCE && !MODULE_SIG_ALL

Then you didn't do that. You broke it, you get to keep both pieces.

Again: is there an actual valid use case?
Rusty.


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-02-17 01:21    [W:0.356 / U:0.804 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site