From: Alexander Holler <holler@ahsoftware.de>
To: Olaf Titz <olaf@bigred.inka.de>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.hengli.com.au>,
David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>,
David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: MODSIGN without RTC?
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2013 14:00:56 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <511A3D08.20605@ahsoftware.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <51194A1F.4060900@ahsoftware.de>
Am 11.02.2013 20:44, schrieb Alexander Holler:
> Am 07.02.2013 19:44, schrieb Olaf Titz:
>>> Another option would be to make a configure option to just ignore the
>>> date. I'm not sure if I would like to use MODSIGN when I have to fear
>>> that the machine wouldn't start when the RTC fails or got set to a wrong
>>> date.
>>
>> Or just ignore the date unconditionally. After all, when a certificate
>> check fails due to out-of-validity-period, then you can always "fix"
>> that by appropriately setting the clock. So for security, in this
>> application, the date check is outright useless.
>
> I don't think that is an option, because the date check is part of the
> crypto-api and not a part of the modsign-stuff.
>
> So it's necessary that the crypto-api offers a flag to ignore the dates
> and another flag to mark such keys as invalid because of the date. The
> first flag is necessary to load and use the keys, the second flag for
> (maybe) other users of the crypto-api which might not use such invalid
> keys.
Another option would be, to just load every key, regardless of the dates
of the keys, and let the user of the keys (e.g. modsign) decide if they
accept the dates in the keys.
But I'm missing the big picture about the crypto-api and their users,
therefor I better don't touch that part of the kernel myself. ;)
Regards,
Alexander
prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-02-12 13:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-02-06 23:42 MODSIGN without RTC? Alexander Holler
2013-02-07 1:06 ` Alexander Holler
2013-02-07 6:42 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2013-02-07 7:01 ` Alexander Holler
2013-02-07 10:54 ` Alexander Holler
2013-02-13 9:30 ` Alexander Holler
2013-02-07 18:44 ` Olaf Titz
2013-02-11 19:44 ` Alexander Holler
2013-02-12 13:00 ` Alexander Holler [this message]
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=511A3D08.20605@ahsoftware.de \
--to=holler@ahsoftware.de \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=herbert@gondor.hengli.com.au \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=olaf@bigred.inka.de \
--cc=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
/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