From: Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
Cc: keyrings@vger.kernel.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/7] KEYS: Adjust public key signature handling
Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2016 07:10:27 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1456920627.2780.60.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160229182136.27797.75917.stgit@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
Hi David,
On Mon, 2016-02-29 at 18:21 +0000, David Howells wrote:
> These patches do the following:
>
> (1) Retain a signature in an asymmetric-type key and associate with it the
> identifiers that will match a key that can be used to verify it.
>
> (2) Differentiate an X.509 cert that cannot be used versus one that cannot
> be verified due to unavailable crypto. This is noted in the
> structures involved.
>
> (3) Determination of the self-signedness of an X.509 cert is improved to
> include checks on the subject/issuer names and the key
> algorithm/signature algorithm types.
>
> (4) Self-signed X.509 certificates are consistency checked early on if the
> appropriate crypto is available.
>
> This set of patches is a prelude to a set that changes how trustworthiness
> is determined.
These patches don't apply directly on top of linux-security. Maybe
they apply on top of an updated version of the "X.509: Software public
key subtype changes" patch set. In which branch are these patches?
thanks,
Mimi
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-03-02 12:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-02-29 18:21 [RFC PATCH 0/7] KEYS: Adjust public key signature handling David Howells
2016-02-29 18:21 ` [RFC PATCH 1/7] X.509: Whitespace cleanup David Howells
2016-02-29 18:21 ` [RFC PATCH 2/7] KEYS: Allow authentication data to be stored in an asymmetric key David Howells
2016-02-29 18:21 ` [RFC PATCH 3/7] KEYS: Add identifier pointers to public_key_signature struct David Howells
2016-02-29 18:22 ` [RFC PATCH 4/7] X.509: Retain the key verification data David Howells
2016-02-29 18:22 ` [RFC PATCH 5/7] PKCS#7: Make the signature a pointer rather than embedding it David Howells
2016-02-29 18:22 ` [RFC PATCH 6/7] X.509: Extract signature digest and make self-signed cert checks earlier David Howells
2016-02-29 18:22 ` [RFC PATCH 7/7] There's a bug in the code determining whether a certificate is self-signed David Howells
2016-03-02 12:10 ` Mimi Zohar [this message]
2016-03-02 12:24 ` [RFC PATCH 0/7] KEYS: Adjust public key signature handling David Howells
2016-03-02 15:00 ` Mimi Zohar
2016-03-04 11:22 ` David Howells
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=1456920627.2780.60.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=keyrings@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
/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