Hi Seth,

On Tue, 2019-02-05 at 09:18 -0600, Seth Forshee wrote:

On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 02:18:59PM -0500, Mimi Zohar wrote:

quoted

Require signed kernel modules on systems with secure boot mode enabled.

To coordinate between appended kernel module signatures and IMA
signatures, only define an IMA MODULE_CHECK policy rule if
CONFIG_MODULE_SIG is not enabled.

This patch defines a function named set_module_sig_required() and renames
is_module_sig_enforced() to is_module_sig_enforced_or_required().  The
call to set_module_sig_required() is dependent on CONFIG_IMA_ARCH_POLICY
being enabled.

Signed-off-by: Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com>

With respect to interactions with the kernel lockdown patches, this
looks better than the patches I saw previously. I don't feel like I know
enough about what's going on with IMA to ack the patch, but I feel
confident that it's at least not going to break signature enforcement
for us.

Thank you for testing!  Could this be translated into a "tested-by"
"(for w/lockdown patches)"?

Mimi