Mimi Zohar <zo...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 2017-04-18 at 17:17 -0300, Thiago Jung Bauermann wrote:
> > IMA will use the module_signature format for append signatures, so export
> > the relevant definitions and factor out the code which verifies that the
> > appended signature trailer is valid.
> > Also, create a CONFIG_MODULE_SIG_FORMAT option so that IMA can select it
> > and be able to use validate_module_signature without having to depend on
> > CONFIG_MODULE_SIG.
> Basically we want to generalize the concept of an appended signature.
> Referring to it as a "module signature format" seems a bit confusing.
> David, would you have a problem with changing the appended string from
> "~Module signature appended~\n" to something more generic?
Conceptually, no. Is it possible that doing so could break someone's module
that they load on multiple versions of the kernel? Say a module that only
exports things and doesn't use anything from the core or any other module.
Also, it needs to reasonably long and distinct enough to prevent a false