Mimi Zohar <[email protected]> writes: > On Wed, 2012-09-12 at 17:04 +0930, Rusty Russell wrote: >> "H. Peter Anvin" <[email protected]> writes: >> >> > On 09/06/2012 11:13 AM, Kees Cook wrote: >> >> Instead of (or in addition to) kernel module signing, being able to reason >> >> about the origin of a kernel module would be valuable in situations >> >> where an OS already trusts a specific file system, file, etc, due to >> >> things like security labels or an existing root of trust to a partition >> >> through things like dm-verity. >> >> >> >> This introduces a new syscall (currently only on x86), similar to >> >> init_module, that has only two arguments. The first argument is used as >> >> a file descriptor to the module and the second argument is a pointer to >> >> the NULL terminated string of module arguments. >> >> >> > >> > Please use the standard naming convention, which is an f- prefix (i.e. >> > finit_module()). >> >> Good point; I just did a replace here. > > Have you pushed out the changes? And if so, to where?
No, I kept them in my patch series but out of linux-next, since I thought you disliked the placement of the security hooks? Cheers, Rusty. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
