From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E160E99A for ; Mon, 1 Aug 2016 17:16:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mx2.suse.de (mx2.suse.de [195.135.220.15]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 72B8521E for ; Mon, 1 Aug 2016 17:16:00 +0000 (UTC) Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2016 19:15:57 +0200 From: "Luis R. Rodriguez" To: Andy Lutomirski , David Howells Message-ID: <20160801171557.GT3296@wotan.suse.de> References: <1469648220.23563.15.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20160728165728.GR4541@io.lakedaemon.net> <1469830256.23563.200.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20160730163626.GP3296@wotan.suse.de> <1469934481.23563.274.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1469979098.23563.300.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Cc: Jason Cooper , "ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org" , James Bottomley , Mark Brown Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] Last minute nominations: mcgrof and toshi List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Sun, Jul 31, 2016 at 09:19:28AM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > Also, are there any plans to move module signature verification into > .kernel_post_read_file? That's a question for David, but from what I gather and as I mentioned in this thread before, part of the problem is module signing is not an LSM. Now with LSM stacking in place it should in theory be possible to LSM'ify module signing, but that requires work, module signing would then become a mini LSM and distros can stack it. Luis