Firmware signing -- Re: [PATCH 00/27] security, efi: Add kernel lockdown
From: Alan Cox <hidden>
Date: 2017-11-14 00:21:54
Also in:
linux-efi, lkml
From: Alan Cox <hidden>
Date: 2017-11-14 00:21:54
Also in:
linux-efi, lkml
On Mon, 13 Nov 2017 14:09:10 -0800 Linus Torvalds [off-list ref] wrote:
On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 1:44 PM, David Howells [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
Whilst that may be true, we either have to check signatures on every bit of firmware that the appropriate driver doesn't say is meant to be signed or not bother.I vote for "not bother". Seriously, if you have firmware in /lib/firmware, and you don't trust it, what the hell are you doing?
Booting a computer 8) - does anyone trust firmware ??? That aside if you can replace the firmware with your own, and your own firmware compromises the system then you have a privilege escalation from CAP_SYS_DAC to CAP_SYS_RAWIO just as you do with unsigned modules (you can't load modules without lots of rights but who cares because you can simply use cp to put them there with lesser rights and let the kernel do it). Alan -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-security-module" in the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html