Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756355AbaAFVdy (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Jan 2014 16:33:54 -0500 Received: from mail-oa0-f44.google.com ([209.85.219.44]:45672 "EHLO mail-oa0-f44.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754992AbaAFVdx (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Jan 2014 16:33:53 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <52C5D28F.6030008@zytor.com> References: <20131121191907.GA26366@srcf.ucam.org> <20131122185706.GK4046@redhat.com> <87vbzju6ql.fsf@xmission.com> <20131125163920.GC23094@redhat.com> <87fvqj2vxz.fsf@xmission.com> <20131126142759.GA5473@redhat.com> <20131219125439.GA6379@lst.de> <20131220141917.GB27063@redhat.com> <87a9fvqfs4.fsf@xmission.com> <20140102203912.GB22822@redhat.com> <52C5D28F.6030008@zytor.com> Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2014 16:33:52 -0500 X-Google-Sender-Auth: _ZyPLk5gVxeVe2nYbTYWUURyMos Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/6] kexec: A new system call, kexec_file_load, for in kernel kexec From: Josh Boyer To: "H. Peter Anvin" Cc: Vivek Goyal , Kees Cook , "Eric W. Biederman" , Torsten Duwe , Matthew Garrett , Greg KH , LKML , kexec , Peter Jones Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 3:56 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > On 01/02/2014 12:39 PM, Vivek Goyal wrote: >> >> If secureboot is enabled, it enforces module signature verification. I >> think similar will happen for kexec too. How would kernel know that on >> a secureboot platform fd original verification will happen and it is >> sufficient. >> >> I personally want to support bzImage as well (apart from ELF) because >> distributions has been shipping bzImage for a long time and I don't >> want to enforce a change there because of secureboot. It is not necessary. >> Right now I am thinking more about storing detached bzImage signatures >> and passing those signatures to kexec system call. >> > > Since the secureboot scenario probably means people will be signing > those kernels, and those kernels are going to be EFI images, that in > order to have "one kernel, one signature" there will be a desire to > support signed PE images. Yes, PE is ugly but it shouldn't be too bad. > However, it is probably one of those things that can be dealt with one > bit at a time. David Howells posted patches to support signed PE binaries early last year. They were rejected rather quickly. https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/2/21/196 That was for loading keys via PE binaries, but the parser is needed either way. Unless I'm misunderstanding what you're suggesting? josh -- 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/