* Chris Murphy:

> On Mon, Jun 27, 2022 at 1:56 AM Florian Weimer <fwei...@redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>> * Neal Gompa:
>>
>> > I treat Secure Boot purely as a compatibility interface. We need to do
>> > just enough to get through the secure boot environment.
>>
>> Right.  It's not even clear to me why we enforce kernel module
>> signatures in Secure Boot mode, and disable a few other kernel features.
>
> If users can load arbitrary unsigned kernel modules or hibernation
> images, it silently circumvents UEFI Secure Boot. I agree this is a
> frustrating paradigm for users who want certain features like using
> 3rd party modules with a Fedora kernel, or using locked down kernel
> features, but I'm not sure what the alternative is.

Do we revoke signatures on Fedora kernels with ring 0 escalations?
I don't think so.  Other distributions share the same trust root and
do not revoke kernel signatures, either.  Doesn't this mean there is
an existing bypass already, by booting through a vulnerable kernel,
exploiting it, and then chain-loading another kernel with secure boot
effectively disabled (but perhaps lying to userspace about the status)?

Thanks,
Florian
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Reply via email to