Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S937577AbdDSPaB (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Apr 2017 11:30:01 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:59074 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S935114AbdDSP3z (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Apr 2017 11:29:55 -0400 DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mx1.redhat.com E91DE8F860 Authentication-Results: ext-mx03.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: ext-mx03.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=dhowells@redhat.com DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 mx1.redhat.com E91DE8F860 Organization: Red Hat UK Ltd. Registered Address: Red Hat UK Ltd, Amberley Place, 107-111 Peascod Street, Windsor, Berkshire, SI4 1TE, United Kingdom. Registered in England and Wales under Company Registration No. 3798903 From: David Howells In-Reply-To: <9f97544c-cb49-c2a3-ecec-7840386d9281@ADLINKtech.com> References: <9f97544c-cb49-c2a3-ecec-7840386d9281@ADLINKtech.com> <149141141298.29162.5612793122429261720.stgit@warthog.procyon.org.uk> <149141145858.29162.13072730133817038218.stgit@warthog.procyon.org.uk> To: Jens Rottmann Cc: dhowells@redhat.com, Thomas Gleixner , LKML , gnomes@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, Daniel Lezcano , linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, keyrings@vger.kernel.org, Andres Salomon Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/38] Annotate hardware config module parameters in drivers/clocksource/ MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <25529.1492615788.1@warthog.procyon.org.uk> Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2017 16:29:48 +0100 Message-ID: <25530.1492615788@warthog.procyon.org.uk> X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.27]); Wed, 19 Apr 2017 15:29:55 +0000 (UTC) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 450 Lines: 15 Jens Rottmann wrote: > > When the kernel is running in secure boot mode [...] prevent > > access by means of configuring driver modules > > I may easily be wrong, but doesn't secure boot require EFI? For the patches I have, yes. It could feasibly be done by some other mechanism, though I don't know that such an alternative exists. > Do secure boot capable systems with old CS5535/36 even exist? No idea. David