On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 11:38:58AM +0100, David Howells wrote: > Luis R. Rodriguez <mcgrof@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > "PKCS#7: Add an optional authenticated attribute to hold firmware name" > > https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/dhowells/linux-fs.git/commit/?h=fwsign-pkcs7&id=1448377a369993f864915743cfb34772e730213good > > > > 1.3.6.1.4.1.2312.16 Linux kernel > > 1.3.6.1.4.1.2312.16.2 - PKCS#7/CMS SignerInfo attribute types > > 1.3.6.1.4.1.2312.16.2.1 - firmwareName > > > > I take it you are referring to this? > > Yes. > > > If we follow this model we'd then need something like: > > > > 1.3.6.1.4.1.2312.16.2.2 - seLinuxPolicyName > > > > That should mean each OID that has different file names would need to be > > explicit about and have a similar entry on the registry. I find that pretty > > redundant and would like to avoid that if possible. > > firmwareName is easy for people to understand - it's the name the kernel asks > for and the filename of the blob. seLinuxPolicyName is, I think, a lot more > tricky since a lot of people don't use SELinux, and most that do don't > understand it (most people that use it aren't even really aware of it). > > If you can use the firmwareName as the SELinux/LSM key, I would suggest doing > so - even if you dress it up as a path (/lib/firmware/<firmwareName>). It seems we don't have to worry about it now, and perhaps SELinux folks might go another route. Luis _______________________________________________ Selinux mailing list Selinux@xxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe, send email to Selinux-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxx. To get help, send an email containing "help" to Selinux-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.
