On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 6:53 PM, Vivek Goyal <vgoyal at redhat.com> wrote: > On Thu, Nov 01, 2012 at 02:52:25PM +0000, Matthew Garrett wrote: >> On Thu, Nov 01, 2012 at 10:43:04AM -0400, Vivek Goyal wrote: >> >> > So I think this does satisfy the requirement matthew specified. Isn't it? >> > Matthew, what do you think? >> >> Sure, if you can ensure that. You'll need to figure out how to get the >> build system to sign the userspace binaries and you'll need to ensure >> that they're statically linked and don't dlopen anything (including the >> nsswitch modules), but otherwise that should work. >> > > [ CC peter jones ] > > Ok, so even if we build kexec-tools statically with glibc, we have the > issue of name service switch modules. glibc will still do dlopen on > these modules. So what are options now. > > - Sign glibc and associated shared libraries. Do not allow unsigned > shared library to dynamically link with signed executable. > > - Peter mentioned that work with uClibc for kexec-tools. > > I personally think that however hard it is but first option sounds like > a long term solution. We might have more user space processes which > we might have to trust a generic solution will help with that. For example, > we might have to sign and trust qemu at some point of time. > > Are there other ways of handing glibc issue? > Have you seen http://sourceware.org/glibc/wiki/FAQ - "Even statically linked programs need some shared libraries which is not acceptable for me. What can I do?" Probably, worth trying. Balbir Singh
