LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Adrian Bunk <bunk@stusta.de>
To: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu
Cc: Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
	torvalds@linux-foundation.org, herbert.xu@redhat.com,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, arjan@infradead.org,
	linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] MODSIGN: Kernel module signing
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 22:32:40 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070215213240.GG13958@stusta.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200702152055.l1FKtfTY012824@turing-police.cc.vt.edu>

On Thu, Feb 15, 2007 at 03:55:41PM -0500, Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Feb 2007 23:13:45 EST, Dave Jones said:
> > One argument in its favour is aparently Red Hat isn't the only vendor
> > with something like this.  I've not investigated it, but I hear rumours
> > that suse has something similar.  Having everyone using the same code
> > would be a win for obvious reasons.
> 
> Another argument in its favor is that it actually allows the kernel to
> implement *real* checking of module licenses and trumps all the proposals
> to deal with MODULE_LICENSE("GPL\0Haha!").  A vendor (or user) that wants
> to be *sure* that only *really really* GPL modules are loaded can simply
> refuse to load unsigned modules - and then refuse to sign a module until
> after they had themselves visited the source's website, verified that the
> source code was available under GPL, and so on.
> 
> Remember - the GPL is about the availability of the source.  And at modprobe
> time, the source isn't available.  So you're left with two options:
> 
> 1) Trust the binary to not lie to you about its license.
> 2) Ask a trusted 3rd party (usually, the person/distro that built the kernel)
> whether they've verified the claim that it's really GPL.

There are different opinions whether the "complete source code" of the 
GPLv2 includes in such cases public keys, making it questionable whether 
your example will survive at court in all jurisdictions.

E.g. remember that gpl-violations.org has already successfully enforced 
the publication of public keys for "firmware only loads signed kernels" 
cases by threatening companies to otherwise take legal actions in 
Germany.

cu
Adrian

-- 

       "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
        of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
       "Only a promise," Lao Er said.
                                       Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed


  reply	other threads:[~2007-02-15 21:32 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-02-14 19:09 David Howells
2007-02-14 19:09 ` [PATCH 2/6] MODSIGN: In-kernel crypto extensions David Howells
2007-02-14 19:09 ` [PATCH 3/6] MODSIGN: Add indications of module ELF types David Howells
2007-02-14 19:09 ` [PATCH 4/6] MODSIGN: Module ELF verifier David Howells
2007-02-14 19:10 ` [PATCH 5/6] MODSIGN: Module signature checker and key manager David Howells
2007-02-14 19:10 ` [PATCH 6/6] MODSIGN: Apply signature checking to modules on module load David Howells
2007-02-14 19:26 ` [PATCH 0/6] MODSIGN: Kernel module signing Linus Torvalds
2007-02-14 19:40 ` David Howells
2007-02-14 21:32   ` Michael Halcrow
2007-02-14 21:59   ` David Howells
2007-02-14 22:21     ` Michael Halcrow
2007-02-15 21:31   ` Indan Zupancic
2007-02-15  3:41 ` Andrew Morton
2007-02-15  4:13   ` Dave Jones
2007-02-15  5:35     ` Andreas Gruenbacher
2007-02-15  5:45       ` Dave Jones
2007-02-15  6:14         ` Andreas Gruenbacher
2007-02-15  6:22           ` Dave Jones
2007-02-15 20:34           ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2007-02-15 22:12             ` Andreas Gruenbacher
2007-02-16  0:15               ` Olaf Kirch
2007-02-15 22:10           ` Pavel Machek
2007-02-15 20:55     ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2007-02-15 21:32       ` Adrian Bunk [this message]
2007-02-15 22:12         ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2007-02-15 14:35 ` Roman Zippel
2007-02-15 17:32 ` David Howells
2007-02-15 18:33   ` Roman Zippel
2007-02-15 20:01     ` David Lang
2007-02-15 21:01       ` Roman Zippel
2007-02-15 21:03 ` Adrian Bunk
2007-02-15 22:13 ` Pavel Machek
2007-02-16 20:21   ` Dave Jones
2007-02-16 20:27     ` Arjan van de Ven
     [not found] <7OPWh-470-9@gated-at.bofh.it>
     [not found] ` <7OxPF-16i-7@gated-at.bofh.it>
     [not found]   ` <7OSKA-8A-17@gated-at.bofh.it>
     [not found]     ` <7OTGJ-1G5-23@gated-at.bofh.it>
2007-02-16 15:38       ` Bodo Eggert

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20070215213240.GG13958@stusta.de \
    --to=bunk@stusta.de \
    --cc=Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=arjan@infradead.org \
    --cc=davej@redhat.com \
    --cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
    --cc=herbert.xu@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    --subject='Re: [PATCH 0/6] MODSIGN: Kernel module signing' \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).