All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>
To: Dave Young <dyoung@redhat.com>
Cc: Josh Boyer <jwboyer@fedoraproject.org>,
	Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>, kexec <kexec@lists.infradead.org>,
	Petr Tesarik <ptesarik@suse.cz>,
	"Linux-Kernel@Vger. Kernel. Org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Subject: Re: kexec_load(2) bypasses signature verification
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2015 11:59:20 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150625155920.GA28863@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150625084818.GB20085@dhcp-128-31.nay.redhat.com>

On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 04:48:18PM +0800, Dave Young wrote:
> On 06/19/15 at 09:09am, Vivek Goyal wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 04:18:16PM +0800, Dave Young wrote:
> > > > > If we want to disable unsigned kernel loading at compile time, then we
> > > > > really need to work on decoupling CONFIG_KEXEC and CONFIG_FILE_KEXEC.
> > > > > Introducing another config option is not the way forward, IMHO.
> > > > 
> > > > Yes, let's do it in this way since everyone is fine with it.
> > > 
> > > I will work on a patch if nobody else have interest or no time on it.
> > 
> > Thanks Dave. Will be good if you can get this done.
> 
> Vivek, I worked out some draft patches here:
> https://github.com/daveyoung/linux/commits/kexec-syscall-cleanup
> 
> Basiclly I split kexec_file first, then add CONFIG_KEXEC_CORE kconfig option
> then split kexec_load code from general code.
> 
> There's a lot of #ifdef CONFIG_KEXEC in kernel source, because CONFIG_KEXEC
> can be disabled so I changed all kernel general and x86 #ifdef to use
> CONFIG_KEXEC_CORE if necessary. For other arches dependent code with #ifdef
> I did not change anything other than the new Kconfig option. It will works
> because only x86 support KEXEC_FILE.
> 
> Please take a look if you have time, if this is not what you want please let
> me know.
> 
> I will have no time this week, only did building test, will do more test next
> week, if everything is ok I can send out the patches to list for review.

Hi Dave,

I have put few comments in github. Please have a look. Once you have
another version of patches, I will have another look.

Thanks
Vivek

_______________________________________________
kexec mailing list
kexec@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>
To: Dave Young <dyoung@redhat.com>
Cc: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
	Josh Boyer <jwboyer@fedoraproject.org>,
	"Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>, Petr Tesarik <ptesarik@suse.cz>,
	kexec <kexec@lists.infradead.org>,
	"Linux-Kernel@Vger. Kernel. Org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: kexec_load(2) bypasses signature verification
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2015 11:59:20 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150625155920.GA28863@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150625084818.GB20085@dhcp-128-31.nay.redhat.com>

On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 04:48:18PM +0800, Dave Young wrote:
> On 06/19/15 at 09:09am, Vivek Goyal wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 04:18:16PM +0800, Dave Young wrote:
> > > > > If we want to disable unsigned kernel loading at compile time, then we
> > > > > really need to work on decoupling CONFIG_KEXEC and CONFIG_FILE_KEXEC.
> > > > > Introducing another config option is not the way forward, IMHO.
> > > > 
> > > > Yes, let's do it in this way since everyone is fine with it.
> > > 
> > > I will work on a patch if nobody else have interest or no time on it.
> > 
> > Thanks Dave. Will be good if you can get this done.
> 
> Vivek, I worked out some draft patches here:
> https://github.com/daveyoung/linux/commits/kexec-syscall-cleanup
> 
> Basiclly I split kexec_file first, then add CONFIG_KEXEC_CORE kconfig option
> then split kexec_load code from general code.
> 
> There's a lot of #ifdef CONFIG_KEXEC in kernel source, because CONFIG_KEXEC
> can be disabled so I changed all kernel general and x86 #ifdef to use
> CONFIG_KEXEC_CORE if necessary. For other arches dependent code with #ifdef
> I did not change anything other than the new Kconfig option. It will works
> because only x86 support KEXEC_FILE.
> 
> Please take a look if you have time, if this is not what you want please let
> me know.
> 
> I will have no time this week, only did building test, will do more test next
> week, if everything is ok I can send out the patches to list for review.

Hi Dave,

I have put few comments in github. Please have a look. Once you have
another version of patches, I will have another look.

Thanks
Vivek

  reply	other threads:[~2015-06-25 15:59 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 50+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-06-15  3:50 kexec_load(2) bypasses signature verification Theodore Ts'o
2015-06-15  3:50 ` Theodore Ts'o
2015-06-15  9:11 ` Dave Young
2015-06-15  9:28   ` Petr Tesarik
2015-06-15 12:14 ` Josh Boyer
2015-06-15 12:14   ` Josh Boyer
2015-06-15 13:17   ` Theodore Ts'o
2015-06-15 13:17     ` Theodore Ts'o
2015-06-15 13:37     ` Josh Boyer
2015-06-15 13:37       ` Josh Boyer
2015-06-15 20:01       ` Theodore Ts'o
2015-06-15 20:01         ` Theodore Ts'o
2015-06-16 19:38         ` Eric W. Biederman
2015-06-16 19:38           ` Eric W. Biederman
2015-06-16 20:27           ` Vivek Goyal
2015-06-16 20:27             ` Vivek Goyal
2015-06-17  1:32             ` Eric W. Biederman
2015-06-17  1:32               ` Eric W. Biederman
2015-06-17  1:47               ` Vivek Goyal
2015-06-17  1:47                 ` Vivek Goyal
2015-06-18  1:16                 ` Dave Young
2015-06-18  1:16                   ` Dave Young
2015-06-18  2:02                   ` Dave Young
2015-06-18  2:02                     ` Dave Young
2015-06-18 13:30                     ` Vivek Goyal
2015-06-18 13:30                       ` Vivek Goyal
2015-06-18 14:41                       ` Eric W. Biederman
2015-06-18 14:41                         ` Eric W. Biederman
2015-06-19  6:21                       ` Dave Young
2015-06-19  6:21                         ` Dave Young
2015-06-19  8:18                         ` Dave Young
2015-06-19  8:18                           ` Dave Young
2015-06-19 13:09                           ` Vivek Goyal
2015-06-19 13:09                             ` Vivek Goyal
2015-06-25  8:48                             ` Dave Young
2015-06-25  8:48                               ` Dave Young
2015-06-25 15:59                               ` Vivek Goyal [this message]
2015-06-25 15:59                                 ` Vivek Goyal
2015-06-26  1:59                                 ` Dave Young
2015-06-26  1:59                                   ` Dave Young
2015-06-19  7:04                 ` Dave Young
2015-06-19  7:04                   ` Dave Young
2015-06-19 13:09                   ` Vivek Goyal
2015-06-19 13:09                     ` Vivek Goyal
2015-06-17  3:26             ` Theodore Ts'o
2015-06-17  3:26               ` Theodore Ts'o
2015-06-17 10:55         ` One Thousand Gnomes
2015-06-17 10:55           ` One Thousand Gnomes
2015-06-18  1:25         ` Dave Young
2015-06-18  1:25           ` Dave Young

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20150625155920.GA28863@redhat.com \
    --to=vgoyal@redhat.com \
    --cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
    --cc=dyoung@redhat.com \
    --cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
    --cc=jwboyer@fedoraproject.org \
    --cc=kexec@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=ptesarik@suse.cz \
    --cc=tytso@mit.edu \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
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.