All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
diff for duplicates of <1517255903.29187.560.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com>

diff --git a/a/1.txt b/N1/1.txt
index d0306e1..69f460e 100644
--- a/a/1.txt
+++ b/N1/1.txt
@@ -5,9 +5,9 @@ On Sat, 2018-01-27 at 19:47 -0500, Mimi Zohar wrote:
 > > > > > Originally IMA allowed a builtin policy to be replaced with a custom
 > > > > > policy, by simply cat'ing a file into the securityfs IMA policy file.
 > > > > > Currently, if new rules can be added to the custom policy (Kconfig
-> > > > > IMA_WRITE_POLICY enabled), the policy file must be signed.  Similarly,
+> > > > > IMA_WRITE_POLICY enabled), the policy file must be signed.  Similarly,
 > > > > > if the builtin "secure-boot" policy is defined on the boot command
-> > > > > line, the custom policy must be signed.  Test "ima01 ima_policy.sh"
+> > > > > line, the custom policy must be signed.  Test "ima01 ima_policy.sh"
 > > > > > should first detect if the policy must be signed, before running the
 > > > > > tests.
 > > 
@@ -19,7 +19,7 @@ On Sat, 2018-01-27 at 19:47 -0500, Mimi Zohar wrote:
 > > security/integrity/ima/ima_fs.c which handles IMA sysfs doesn't have this functionality.
 > > Is it deliberate (security reason), that it's not exported to users?
 > 
-> This isn't really an IMA issue, but a TPM one.  The TPM device driver
+> This isn't really an IMA issue, but a TPM one.  The TPM device driver
 > would need to export this information.
 
 Sorry, that was an answer to the wrong question.  In ima_tpm.sh,
@@ -29,13 +29,13 @@ there's the question:
 
 Commit 313d21e "tpm: device class for tpm" moved the TPM sysfs
 location from /sys/class/misc/tpmX/device/ to
-/sys/class/tpm/tpmX/device/.  The pcrs are 
+/sys/class/tpm/tpmX/device/.  The pcrs are 
 
 
 To answer your question, if after writing the custom policy, the
 policy file disappears, then you obviously can't extend the policy.
- If the policy file doesn't disappear, you might not be able to extend
-the policy, just view it.  Sorry, there's no method of knowing apriori
+ If the policy file doesn't disappear, you might not be able to extend
+the policy, just view it.  Sorry, there's no method of knowing apriori
 whether the policy can be extended.
 
 Mimi
diff --git a/a/content_digest b/N1/content_digest
index 1a2c695..a4fe2ab 100644
--- a/a/content_digest
+++ b/N1/content_digest
@@ -5,13 +5,9 @@
  "ref\020180126175110.boaepz6dqe3uojq6@dell5510\0"
  "ref\01517100440.29187.120.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com\0"
  "From\0Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>\0"
- "Subject\0Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] IMA: Rewrite tests into new API + fixes\0"
+ "Subject\0[LTP] [RFC PATCH 0/2] IMA: Rewrite tests into new API + fixes\0"
  "Date\0Mon, 29 Jan 2018 14:58:23 -0500\0"
- "To\0Petr Vorel <pvorel@suse.cz>\0"
- "Cc\0ltp@lists.linux.it"
-  Dmitry Kasatkin <dmitry.kasatkin@huawei.com>
-  linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org
- " Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@polito.it>\0"
+ "To\0ltp@lists.linux.it\0"
  "\00:1\0"
  "b\0"
  "On Sat, 2018-01-27 at 19:47 -0500, Mimi Zohar wrote:\n"
@@ -21,9 +17,9 @@
  "> > > > > Originally IMA allowed a builtin policy to be replaced with a custom\n"
  "> > > > > policy, by simply cat'ing a file into the securityfs IMA policy file.\n"
  "> > > > > Currently, if new rules can be added to the custom policy (Kconfig\n"
- "> > > > > IMA_WRITE_POLICY enabled), the policy file must be signed.  Similarly,\n"
+ "> > > > > IMA_WRITE_POLICY enabled), the policy file must be signed. \302\240Similarly,\n"
  "> > > > > if the builtin \"secure-boot\" policy is defined on the boot command\n"
- "> > > > > line, the custom policy must be signed.  Test \"ima01 ima_policy.sh\"\n"
+ "> > > > > line, the custom policy must be signed. \302\240Test \"ima01 ima_policy.sh\"\n"
  "> > > > > should first detect if the policy must be signed, before running the\n"
  "> > > > > tests.\n"
  "> > \n"
@@ -35,7 +31,7 @@
  "> > security/integrity/ima/ima_fs.c which handles IMA sysfs doesn't have this functionality.\n"
  "> > Is it deliberate (security reason), that it's not exported to users?\n"
  "> \n"
- "> This isn't really an IMA issue, but a TPM one.  The TPM device driver\n"
+ "> This isn't really an IMA issue, but a TPM one. \302\240The TPM device driver\n"
  "> would need to export this information.\n"
  "\n"
  "Sorry, that was an answer to the wrong question.  In ima_tpm.sh,\n"
@@ -45,15 +41,15 @@
  "\n"
  "Commit 313d21e \"tpm: device class for tpm\" moved the TPM sysfs\n"
  "location from /sys/class/misc/tpmX/device/ to\n"
- "/sys/class/tpm/tpmX/device/.  The pcrs are \n"
+ "/sys/class/tpm/tpmX/device/. \302\240The pcrs are\302\240\n"
  "\n"
  "\n"
  "To answer your question, if after writing the custom policy, the\n"
  "policy file disappears, then you obviously can't extend the policy.\n"
- " If the policy file doesn't disappear, you might not be able to extend\n"
- "the policy, just view it.  Sorry, there's no method of knowing apriori\n"
+ "\302\240If the policy file doesn't disappear, you might not be able to extend\n"
+ "the policy, just view it. \302\240Sorry, there's no method of knowing apriori\n"
  "whether the policy can be extended.\n"
  "\n"
  Mimi
 
-96054eb06f24d3f251018b2342e0782b31dbd4c3c0c1ff17770bea67fa5969d5
+9e66f66cdff36f6ff4c298d483ac00e559a903bc413fb8935483108af6ae7b67

This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.