[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       linux-keyrings
Subject:    Re: [PATCH] certs: always use secondary keyring first if possible
From:       Dave Young <dyoung () redhat ! com>
Date:       2017-12-14 10:25:13
Message-ID: 20171214102513.GA2371 () dhcp-128-65 ! nay ! redhat ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

On 11/18/17 at 12:47pm, Dave Young wrote:
> Commit d3bfe84129f6 introduced secondary_trusted_keys keyring, current
> users of verify_pkcs7_signature are below:
> net/wireless/reg.c : uses its own trusted_keys
> kernel/module_signing.c : pass NULL trusted_keys 
> crypto/asymmetric_keys/verify_pefile.c : pass NULL trusted_keys
> 
> For both module and pefile verification, there is no reason to use builtin
> keys only. Actually in Fedora kernel module signing code passes 1UL, but
> kexec code does not pass 1UL for pefile verification thus we have below bug
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1470995
> 
> Drop the hard code 1UL checking so that pefile verification can use
> secondary keyring as well.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Dave Young <dyoung@redhat.com>
> ---
>  certs/system_keyring.c |    2 --
>  1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
> 
> --- linux-x86.orig/certs/system_keyring.c
> +++ linux-x86/certs/system_keyring.c
> @@ -229,8 +229,6 @@ int verify_pkcs7_signature(const void *d
>  		goto error;
>  
>  	if (!trusted_keys) {
> -		trusted_keys = builtin_trusted_keys;
> -	} else if (trusted_keys == (void *)1UL) {
>  #ifdef CONFIG_SECONDARY_TRUSTED_KEYRING
>  		trusted_keys = secondary_trusted_keys;
>  #else

Another ping.

If the (-1UL) is really needed, below file need update to use it
But I think it is ugly..
crypto/asymmetric_keys/verify_pefile.c

Thanks
Dave
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe keyrings" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]