Thread (142 messages) 142 messages, 18 authors, 2012-11-23

Re: [RFC] Second attempt at kernel secure boot support

From: Alan Cox <hidden>
Date: 2012-10-31 15:50:04
Also in: lkml

Possibly related (same subject, not in this thread)

quoted
is basically DMA-ing arbitrary data over the whole RAM. I am currently not
able to imagine a scenario how this could be made "secure" (without
storing private keys to sign the hibernation image on the machine itself
which, well, doesn't sound secure either).
That's what the TPM is for (in fact all of this stuff can be done
properly with a TPM while the 'secure' boot stuff can do little if any of
it.
I have a patch that disables that.  I imagine it will be included in the
next submission of the patchset.

You can find it here in the meantime:

http://jwboyer.fedorapeople.org/pub/0001-hibernate-Disable-in-a-Secure-Boot-environment.patch
All this depends on your threat model. If I have physical access to
suspend/resume your machine then you already lost. If I don't have
physical access then I can't boot my unsigned OS to patch your S4 image
so it doesn't matter.

In fact the more I think about this the more it seems disabling hibernate
is basically farting in the wind.

Alan
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help