Re: Trusted kernel patchset for Secure Boot lockdown

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 12:11 PM, Matthew Garrett
<matthew.garrett@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> The conclusion we came to at Plumbers was that this patchset was basically
> fine but that Linus hated the name "securelevel" more than I hate pickled
> herring, so after thinking about this for a few months I've come up with
> "Trusted Kernel". This flag indicates that the kernel is, via some
> external mechanism, trusted and should behave that way. If firmware has
> some way to verify the kernel, it can pass that information on. If userspace
> has some way to verify the kernel, it can set the flag itself. However,
> userspace should not attempt to use the flag as a means to verify that the
> kernel was trusted - untrusted userspace could have set it on an untrusted
> kernel, but by the same metric an untrusted kernel could just set it itself.
>
> If people object to this name then I swear to god that I will open a poll
> on Phoronix to decide the next attempt and you will like that even less.

For the Chrome OS use-case, it might be better described as "untrusted
userspace", but that seems unfriendly. :) The "trusted kernel" name
seems fine to me.

-Kees

-- 
Kees Cook
Chrome OS Security
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-efi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html




[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [IETF Annouce]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [ECOS]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]

  Powered by Linux