From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752761AbbBYNQJ (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Feb 2015 08:16:09 -0500 Received: from cantor2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:33560 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750712AbbBYNQG (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Feb 2015 08:16:06 -0500 Message-ID: <54EDCB13.7030704@suse.cz> Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2015 14:16:03 +0100 From: Michal Marek User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: David Howells , rusty@rustcorp.com.au CC: keyrings@linux-nfs.org, dmitry.kasatkin@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] MODSIGN: Use PKCS#7 for module signatures [ver #3] References: <20150206145834.17303.59753.stgit@warthog.procyon.org.uk> In-Reply-To: <20150206145834.17303.59753.stgit@warthog.procyon.org.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 2015-02-06 15:58, David Howells wrote: > Note that the revised sign-file program no longer supports the "-s " > option as I'm not sure what the best way to deal with this is. Do we generate > a PKCS#7 cert from the signature given, or do we get given a PKCS#7 cert? I > lean towards the latter. It would be convenient to have it, since pesign also has --import-raw-signature. But it can be added back later. Michal