Re: [GIT PULL] Load keys from signed PE binaries
[Posted February 27, 2013 by corbet]
| From: |
| Linus Torvalds <torvalds-AT-linux-foundation.org> |
| To: |
| Matthew Garrett <mjg59-AT-srcf.ucam.org> |
| Subject: |
| Re: [GIT PULL] Load keys from signed PE binaries |
| Date: |
| Thu, 21 Feb 2013 08:58:45 -0800 |
| Message-ID: |
| <CA+55aFy4k07GPmszkBdYvCE-KphKLVowkZoW7hoAvcR+0U=stg@mail.gmail.com> |
| Cc: |
| David Howells <dhowells-AT-redhat.com>,
Josh Boyer <jwboyer-AT-redhat.com>,
Peter Jones <pjones-AT-redhat.com>,
Vivek Goyal <vgoyal-AT-redhat.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook-AT-chromium.org>, keyrings-AT-linux-nfs.org,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel-AT-vger.kernel.org> |
| Archive‑link: | |
Article |
On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 8:42 AM, Matthew Garrett <mjg59@srcf.ucam.org> wrote:
>
> There's only one signing authority, and they only sign PE binaries.
Guys, this is not a dick-sucking contest.
If you want to parse PE binaries, go right ahead.
If Red Hat wants to deep-throat Microsoft, that's *your* issue. That
has nothing what-so-ever to do with the kernel I maintain. It's
trivial for you guys to have a signing machine that parses the PE
binary, verifies the signatures, and signs the resulting keys with
your own key. You already wrote the code, for chissake, it's in that
f*cking pull request.
Why should *I* care? Why should the kernel care about some idiotic "we
only sign PE binaries" stupidity? We support X.509, which is the
standard for signing.
Do this in user land on a trusted machine. There is zero excuse for
doing it in the kernel.
Linus
