Re: [PATCH 2/3] KEYS: Separate the kernel signature checking keyring from module signing

[David Howells]

Mimi Zohar <zohar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Lets assume accepting built in keys should is acceptable for all use
> cases.  Adding additional keys from userspace is probably not acceptable
> for all use cases.  Those keys should be added to specific 'trusted'
> keyrings.
> 
> EVM and IMA-appraisal have separate keyrings for this reason.  I might
> be interested in allowing third party packages to be installed and
> executed, but that doesn't imply that a security.evm extended attribute,
> signed by a third party application, is acceptable.

We should probably look at using the capability of X.509 certificates to
indicate what a key may be used for and noting that in the public_key struct.

David
--
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/