From: Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Matthew Garrett <matthew.garrett@nebula.com>
Cc: "linux-efi@vger.kernel.org" <linux-efi@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-pci@vger.kernel.org" <linux-pci@vger.kernel.org>,
"kexec@lists.infradead.org" <kexec@lists.infradead.org>,
James Morris <jmorris@namei.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org"
<linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/12] Security: Add CAP_COMPROMISE_KERNEL
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2013 15:16:08 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1363806968.2580.86.camel@falcor1.watson.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1363803158.2553.33.camel@x230.sbx07502.somerma.wayport.net>
On Wed, 2013-03-20 at 18:12 +0000, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Wed, 2013-03-20 at 14:01 -0400, Mimi Zohar wrote:
>
> > Sorry, I'm not sure to which work you're referring. If you're referring
> > to Dmitry's "initramfs with digital signature protection" patches, then
> > we're speaking about enforcing integrity, not MAC security.
>
> Well, in the absence of hardcoded in-kernel policy, there needs to be
> some mechanism for ensuring the integrity of a policy. Shipping a signed
> policy initramfs fragment and having any Secure Boot bootloaders pass a
> flag in bootparams indicating that the kernel should panic if that
> fragment isn't present would seem to be the easiest way of doing that.
> Or have I misunderstood the question?
Ok, I was confused by the term "fragmented" initramfs. So once you have
verified the "early" fragmented initramfs signature, this initramfs will
load the "trusted" public keys and could also load the MAC policy. (I
realize that dracut is currently loading the MAC policy, not the
initramfs.) The MAC policy would then be trusted, right? Could we then
use the LSM labels for defining an integrity policy for kexec?
thanks,
Mimi
_______________________________________________
kexec mailing list
kexec@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-03-20 19:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 54+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-03-18 21:32 [PATCH 01/12] Security: Add CAP_COMPROMISE_KERNEL Matthew Garrett
2013-03-18 21:32 ` [PATCH 02/12] SELinux: define mapping for CAP_COMPROMISE_KERNEL Matthew Garrett
2013-03-18 21:32 ` [PATCH 03/12] Secure boot: Add a dummy kernel parameter that will switch on Secure Boot mode Matthew Garrett
2013-03-18 21:32 ` [PATCH 04/12] efi: Enable secure boot lockdown automatically when enabled in firmware Matthew Garrett
2013-03-18 21:32 ` [PATCH 05/12] PCI: Require CAP_COMPROMISE_KERNEL for PCI BAR access Matthew Garrett
2013-03-27 15:03 ` Josh Boyer
2013-03-27 15:08 ` Kyle McMartin
2013-03-28 12:46 ` Josh Boyer
2013-03-18 21:32 ` [PATCH 06/12] x86: Require CAP_COMPROMISE_KERNEL for IO port access Matthew Garrett
2013-03-20 1:00 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-03-18 21:32 ` [PATCH 07/12] ACPI: Limit access to custom_method Matthew Garrett
2013-03-18 21:32 ` [PATCH 08/12] asus-wmi: Restrict debugfs interface Matthew Garrett
2013-03-18 21:32 ` [PATCH 09/12] Require CAP_COMPROMISE_KERNEL for /dev/mem and /dev/kmem access Matthew Garrett
2013-03-18 21:32 ` [PATCH 10/12] acpi: Ignore acpi_rsdp kernel parameter in a secure boot environment Matthew Garrett
2013-03-19 8:47 ` Dave Young
2013-03-19 11:19 ` Josh Boyer
2013-03-19 17:07 ` [PATCH v2] " Josh Boyer
2013-03-18 21:32 ` [PATCH 11/12] x86: Require CAP_COMPROMISE_KERNEL for MSR writing Matthew Garrett
2013-03-18 21:32 ` [PATCH 12/12] kexec: Require CAP_SYS_COMPROMISE_KERNEL Matthew Garrett
2013-03-19 4:47 ` [PATCH 01/12] Security: Add CAP_COMPROMISE_KERNEL James Morris
2013-03-20 1:03 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-03-20 16:41 ` Mimi Zohar
2013-03-20 16:49 ` Matthew Garrett
2013-03-20 18:01 ` Mimi Zohar
2013-03-20 18:12 ` Matthew Garrett
2013-03-20 19:16 ` Mimi Zohar [this message]
2013-03-20 20:37 ` Matthew Garrett
2013-03-20 21:11 ` Mimi Zohar
2013-03-20 21:18 ` Matthew Garrett
2013-03-21 13:43 ` Vivek Goyal
2013-03-21 15:37 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2013-03-21 15:52 ` Vivek Goyal
2013-03-21 15:58 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2013-03-21 16:04 ` Vivek Goyal
2013-03-21 16:19 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2013-03-21 17:15 ` Vivek Goyal
2013-03-21 1:58 ` James Morris
2013-03-19 7:18 ` Yves-Alexis Perez
2013-03-20 1:02 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-03-20 1:05 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-03-20 13:15 ` Matthew Garrett
2013-03-20 15:03 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-03-20 15:14 ` Matthew Garrett
2013-03-20 16:45 ` H. Peter Anvin
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2013-03-20 1:07 Matthew Garrett
2013-03-20 1:11 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-03-20 1:09 Matthew Garrett
2013-03-20 1:28 Matthew Garrett
2013-03-20 2:48 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-03-20 3:08 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-03-20 3:18 ` Alex Williamson
2013-03-20 3:22 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-03-20 3:27 ` Alex Williamson
2013-03-21 16:32 Matthew Garrett
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=1363806968.2580.86.camel@falcor1.watson.ibm.com \
--to=zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=jmorris@namei.org \
--cc=kexec@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-efi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=matthew.garrett@nebula.com \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox