Re: [RFC][PATCH v1 0/2] integrity: module integrity verification

[Rusty Russell <rusty@ozlabs.org>]

On Wed, 8 Feb 2012 16:02:28 +0200, "Kasatkin, Dmitry" <dmitry.kasatkin@intel.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 3:45 PM, Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, 2012-02-08 at 10:09 +1030, Rusty Russell wrote:
> >> The problem is that distributions tend to have two variants of modules:
> >> stripped and unstripped.  Thus you may want to support multiple
> >> signatures, any *one* of which may match.
> >>
> >> I've cc'd the module-init-tools and libkmod maintainers for their
> >> comments, too.
> > Hi Rusty,
> >
> > As a distro knows what it is shipping, why would you need support for
> > both stripped/unstripped versions.  Unless "stripping" occurs post
> > install.  Perhaps something similar to 'prelink'?
> 
> How are they distributed? In separate packages?
> And striped during package creation?
> Then during package building, before archiving, signing tool is simply
> invoked for each binary package,
> so "same" modules from different packages will get own signature.
> 
> Or it goes some other way?

I don't know.  Perhaps it isn't an issue; David Howells and Jon Masters
might have comments.

Cheers,
Rusty.