Re: Linux Firmware Signing

From: Luis R. Rodriguez
Date: Thu Aug 27 2015 - 15:37:11 EST

On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 11:38:58AM +0100, David Howells wrote:
> Luis R. Rodriguez <mcgrof@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > "PKCS#7: Add an optional authenticated attribute to hold firmware name"
> >
> >
> > Linux kernel
> > - PKCS#7/CMS SignerInfo attribute types
> > - firmwareName
> >
> > I take it you are referring to this?
> Yes.
> > If we follow this model we'd then need something like:
> >
> > - seLinuxPolicyName
> >
> > That should mean each OID that has different file names would need to be
> > explicit about and have a similar entry on the registry. I find that pretty
> > redundant and would like to avoid that if possible.
> firmwareName is easy for people to understand - it's the name the kernel asks
> for and the filename of the blob. seLinuxPolicyName is, I think, a lot more
> tricky since a lot of people don't use SELinux, and most that do don't
> understand it (most people that use it aren't even really aware of it).
> If you can use the firmwareName as the SELinux/LSM key, I would suggest doing
> so - even if you dress it up as a path (/lib/firmware/<firmwareName>).

It seems we don't have to worry about it now, and perhaps SELinux folks might
go another route.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at