Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Wed, 7 Apr 2021 18:53:31 +0300
From:   Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@kernel.org>
To:     Stefan Berger <stefanb@linux.ibm.com>
Cc:     keyrings@vger.kernel.org, dhowells@redhat.com, zohar@linux.ibm.com,
        nayna@linux.ibm.com, linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Add support for ECDSA-signed kernel modules
Message-ID: <YG3Ve9CR0zZE+tUu@kernel.org>
References: <20210406185340.1079403-1-stefanb@linux.ibm.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20210406185340.1079403-1-stefanb@linux.ibm.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Apr 06, 2021 at 02:53:38PM -0400, Stefan Berger wrote:
> This series adds support for ECDSA-signed kernel modules.
> 
> The first patch in this series attempts to address the issue where a
> developer created an ECDSA key for signing modules and then falls back
> to compiling an older version of the kernel that does not support
> ECDSA keys. In this case this patch would delete that ECDSA key if it is
> in certs/signing_key.pem and trigger the creation of an RSA key. However,
> for this to work this patch would have to be applied to previous versions
> of the kernel but would also only work for the developer if he/she used a
> stable version of the kernel to which this patch was applied. So whether
> this patch actually achieves the wanted effect is not always guaranteed.

Just wondering why the key needs to be removed in the fallback.

/Jarkko