On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 2:43 PM, Dmitry Kasatkin <dmitry.kasat...@intel.com> wrote: > @@ -2437,6 +2438,14 @@ static int copy_and_check(struct load_info *info, > > info->hdr = hdr; > info->len = len; > + > + err = integrity_module_check(hdr, len); > + if (err < 0) > + goto free_hdr; > + > + /* cut signature tail */ > + info->len = err; > + > return 0; > > free_hdr:
So if I'm reading this correctly, any module that fails signature verification will fail to load. That makes sense, but I wonder if you intend to support a non-enforcing mode for module signatures at all? Actually, a brief document in Documentation describing how this whole mechanism works and what the fail states are would be good. David's patches have it nicely spelled out and I don't see anything similar in your patch set. josh -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
