lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [May]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectShould we automatically generate a module signing key at all?
Date
Hi Michal, Dave,

Should we automatically generate a module signing key at all since that has
the possibility of accidentally overwriting a key that the builder has placed
in the tree?

Should we instead provide a script:

./scripts/generate-key

That generates a key if run and make it so that the build fails if you turn on
module signing and there's no key.

The script could then be parameterised, eg:

./scripts/generate-key -n dhowells@redhat.com -k rsa2048 -d sha256 \
-o ./my-signing-key.priv -x ./my-signing-key.x509 \
-p "correct horse battery staple"

Yes, this might throw randconfig into a strop but that can be dealt with by:

(1) Requiring anyone who runs randconfig to provide a key first just in case.

(2) Marking the CONFIG_MODULE_SIG_ALL option to be ignored by randconfig - it
only applies during installation anyway.

(3) Accept that module *installation* will fail due to a lack of private key
and just handle a complete lack of X.509 certs in the source and build
dirs when assembling system_certificates.S.

David


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-05-18 18:21    [W:0.164 / U:0.268 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site