From: Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: [PULL] modules Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2012 13:53:36 -0700 Message-ID: References: <87fw5m7ipz.fsf@rustcorp.com.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: LKML , Alex Lyashkov , Arnd Bergmann , Dan Carpenter , David Howells , "David S. Miller" , Dmitry Kasatkin , Herbert Xu , Josh Boyer , linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org, Lucas De Marchi , Matthew Garrett , Milan Broz , Ralf Baechle , Randy Dunlap , Sam Ravnborg To: Rusty Russell Return-path: Received: from mail-wi0-f178.google.com ([209.85.212.178]:44114 "EHLO mail-wi0-f178.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754036Ab2JNUx5 (ORCPT ); Sun, 14 Oct 2012 16:53:57 -0400 In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-crypto-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 1:11 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > I've pulled and resolved the branch, and I'm going through it now, but > I'd like this verified before I push out if it all looks fine.. Hmm. So this thing makes me wonder: /* Not having a signature is only an error if we're strict. */ if (err < 0 && fips_enabled) panic("Module verification failed with error %d in FIPS mode\n", err); do we really want to panic (even in fips_enabled mode)? Sounds like it will just kill the machine if we ever end up having an unsigned module by mistake anywhere. I realize that fips_enabled is only for crazy people, but it's exactly code like this that limits it to only crazy people. Is there some *reason* for this? Linus