On Fri, 13 Sept 2024 at 10:30, Roberto Sassu
<roberto.sassu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2024-09-13 at 12:45 +0800, Herbert Xu wrote:
> >
> > Does this address Linus's objections? If not then we cannot proceed.
>
> I hope to get an answer from him.
So honestly, just the series adding pgp key verification I have no
objection to. The use case where some firmware uses pgp to validate
allowed keys in EFI variables etc sounds like a "ok, then we need to
parse them".
The objections I had were against the whole "start doing policy in
kernel", with what sounded like actually parsing and unpacking rpm
contents and verifying them with a pgp key. *That* still sounds like a
disaster to me, and is the part that made me go "why isn't that done
in user space together with then generating the fsverifty
information"?
The argument that the kernel is the only part of the system you trust
is bogus. The kernel does nothing on its own (apart from device
enumeration etc of course), so if you have no trustworthy user space,
then you might as well just give up entirely. At a *minimum* you have
initrd, and that can then be the start of a chain of user space trust.
Parsing rpm files in the kernel really sounds horrendous. But that
doesn't mean that I hate *this* series that just adds pgp key handling
in case there are other valid uses for it.
But maybe I misunderstood the original suggestion from Roberto.
Linus
