Re: [PATCH 09/18] Secure boot: Add a dummy kernel parameter thatwill switch on Secure Boot mode

[Pavel Machek]

You may want to check subject. If it does something, it is not dummy.

> --- a/Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt
> @@ -2784,6 +2784,13 @@ bytes respectively. Such letter suffixes can also be entirely omitted.
>  			Note: increases power consumption, thus should only be
>  			enabled if running jitter sensitive (HPC/RT) workloads.
>  
> +	secureboot_enable=
> +			[KNL] Enables an emulated UEFI Secure Boot mode.  This
> +			locks down various aspects of the kernel guarded by the
> +			CAP_COMPROMISE_KERNEL capability.  This includes things
> +			like /dev/mem, IO port access, and other areas.  It can
> +			be used on non-UEFI machines for testing purposes.
> +
>  	security=	[SECURITY] Choose a security module to enable at boot.
>  			If this boot parameter is not specified, only the first
>  			security module asking for security registration will be
> diff --git a/kernel/cred.c b/kernel/cred.c
> index e0573a4..c3f4e3e 100644
> --- a/kernel/cred.c
> +++ b/kernel/cred.c
> @@ -565,6 +565,23 @@ void __init cred_init(void)
>  				     0, SLAB_HWCACHE_ALIGN|SLAB_PANIC, NULL);
>  }
>  
> +void __init secureboot_enable()
> +{
> +	pr_info("Secure boot enabled\n");
> +	cap_lower((&init_cred)->cap_bset, CAP_COMPROMISE_KERNEL);
> +	cap_lower((&init_cred)->cap_permitted, CAP_COMPROMISE_KERNEL);
> +}

OTOH you don't implement CAP_COMPROMISE_KERNEL, so it is dummy after
all. But CAP_COMPROMISE_KERNEL is infeasible to implement, right?
									Pavel

-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
--
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/