Re: [PATCH 0/6] MODSIGN: Kernel module signing

Hi,

On Thu, 15 Feb 2007, David Lang wrote:

this issue, and these holes keep comeing up in discussions, why can't these
holes be closed? I seem to remember seeing patches that would remove /dev/kmem
being sent to the list, but they weren't accepted into the kernel (and I seem
to remember people being against the concept of removeing them, not against
techincal details of the patches. but this was many years ago)

1. It depends on the ratio of added code and its usefulness. I must assume 
the first patch didn't even make it to the kernel due to its size, so I 
think it's not unreasonable to explore the alternatives.
2. There are many ways to load an unauthorized module, thus you have to 
prevent any modification of the kernel not just in memory but also on 
disk.

bye, Roman