Return-path: Received: from lan.nucleusys.com ([92.247.61.126]:43145 "EHLO zztop.nucleusys.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754025AbbEUFl0 (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 May 2015 01:41:26 -0400 Date: Thu, 21 May 2015 08:41:02 +0300 From: Petko Manolov To: Greg Kroah-Hartman Cc: One Thousand Gnomes , Seth Forshee , "Luis R. Rodriguez" , linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, james.l.morris@oracle.com, serge@hallyn.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, David Howells , Kyle McMartin , David Woodhouse , Joey Lee , Rusty Russell , zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com, mricon@kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFD] linux-firmware key arrangement for firmware signing Message-ID: <20150521054101.GA15037@localhost> (sfid-20150521_074145_720274_F4EEC057) References: <20150519200232.GM23057@wotan.suse.de> <20150520140426.GB126473@ubuntu-hedt> <20150520172446.4dab5399@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> <20150520164613.GD10473@localhost> <20150521044104.GH22632@kroah.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <20150521044104.GH22632@kroah.com> Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 15-05-20 21:41:04, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 07:46:13PM +0300, Petko Manolov wrote: > > On 15-05-20 17:24:46, One Thousand Gnomes wrote: > > > > > > More to the point why do you want to sign firmware files ? Leaving aside the > > > fact that someone will produce a device with GPLv3 firmware just to p*ss you > > > off there's the rather more relevant fact that firmware for devices on a so > > > called "trusted" platform already have signed firmware. > > > > For "trusted" systems one would like to make sure everything that goes in has > > known provenance. Maybe this was the idea? > > If so, then just do what people do today, verify their known valid disk image > before mounting it and then they know they can trust the data on it to be use > for whatever (including firmware.) No kernel changes needed, distro support > is already there for this. I do agree, the infrastructure is already in place. The project i am working on has very strict security requirements, quite unlike regular Linux box. I was pleasantly surprised that it didn't take much kernel hacking to get to the point where stuff is working to our liking. > I too don't understand this need to sign something that you don't really know > what it is from some other company, just to send it to a separate device that > is going to do whatever it wants with it if it is signed or not. This is not the point. What you need to know is _where_ the firmware came from, not _what_ it does once it reach your system. If you don't care about such things, just ignore the signature. :) Petko