Re: [PATCH v2] x86/ima: require signed kernel modules

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

 



On Thu, 2019-03-07 at 14:27 -0800, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 4:18 AM Mimi Zohar <zohar@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > -       if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_IMA_ARCH_POLICY) && arch_ima_get_secureboot())
> > +       if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_IMA_ARCH_POLICY) && arch_ima_get_secureboot()) {
> > +               if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_MODULE_SIG))
> > +                       set_module_sig_enforced();
> >                 return sb_arch_rules;
> 
> Linus previously pushed back on having the lockdown features
> automatically enabled on secure boot systems. Why are we doing the
> same in IMA?

IMA-appraisal is extending the "secure boot" concept to the running
system.

Mimi




[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux Kernel Hardening]     [Linux NFS]     [Linux NILFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux