Re: [GIT PULL] Kernel lockdown for secure boot

[Andy Lutomirski]

On Tue, Apr 3, 2018 at 5:16 PM, Matthew Garrett <mjg59@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 3, 2018 at 5:15 PM Linus Torvalds
> <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>> On Tue, Apr 3, 2018 at 5:10 PM, Matthew Garrett <mjg59@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Exactly like EVERY OTHER KERNEL CONFIG OPTION.
>> >
>> > So your argument is that we should make the user experience worse?
> Without
>> > some sort of verified boot mechanism, lockdown is just security theater.
>> > There's no good reason to enable it unless you have some mechanism for
>> > verifying that you booted something you trust.
>
>> Wow. Way to snip the rest of the email where I told you what the
>> solution was. Let me repeat it here, since you so conveniently missed
>> it and deleted it:
>
> I ignored it because it's not a viable option. Part of the patchset
> disables various kernel command line options. If there's a kernel command
> line option that disables the patchset then it's pointless.

if your secure boot-enabled bootloader can't prevent a bad guy from
using malicious kernel command line parameters, then fix it.