Re: [PATCH 1/4] module: add syscall to load module from fd

[Mimi Zohar]

On Fri, 2012-09-21 at 12:22 +1000, James Morris wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Sep 2012, Kees Cook wrote:
> 
> > Earlier proposals for appending signatures to kernel modules would not be
> > useful in Chrome OS, since it would involve adding an additional set of
> > keys to our kernel and builds for no good reason: we already trust the
> > contents of our root filesystem. We don't need to verify those kernel
> > modules a second time. Having to do signature checking on module loading
> > would slow us down and be redundant. All we need to know is where a
> > module is coming from so we can say yes/no to loading it.
> 
> Just out of interest, has anyone else expressed interest in using this 
> feature?

I'm not so interested in this particular use case, but am interested in
using the new syscall's file descriptor for measuring/appraising a
kernel module's integrity.

thanks,

Mimi


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/