lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2021]   [Aug]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH v4 00/12] Enroll kernel keys thru MOK
From
Date

> >> Jarkko, I think the emphasis should not be on "machine" from Machine
> >> Owner Key (MOK), but on "owner". Whereas Nayna is focusing more on the
> >> "_ca" aspect of the name. Perhaps consider naming it
> >> "system_owner_ca" or something along those lines.

> > What do you gain such overly long identifier? Makes no sense. What
> > is "ca aspect of the name" anyway?
>
> As I mentioned previously, the main usage of this new keyring is that it
> should contain only CA keys which can be later used to vouch for user
> keys loaded onto secondary or IMA keyring at runtime. Having ca in the
> name like .xxxx_ca, would make the keyring name self-describing. Since
> you preferred .system, we can call it .system_ca.

Sounds good to me. Jarkko?

thanks,

Mimi

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2021-08-24 16:39    [W:0.088 / U:0.032 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site