Re: Fw: signed kernel modules?

[Josh Boyer]

On Fri, 2004-10-15 at 11:59, Richard B. Johnson wrote:
> 
> The technical details are that "signed", "sealed", "certified",
> relate to policy. For years policy was not allowed to be included in
> the kernel. In recent times, the kernel has become filthy with
> policy.

I'd disagree.  Do you consider SELinux to be policy as well just because
it's in the kernel?

As David said in his response, it's a mechanism.  Whether _you_ choose
to use it or not decides the "policy".  That's why I said put a config
option around it.  You would still have _choice_.

> it right. What's right for you is wrong for another.

Absolutely.  So why are you trying to prevent people that want to use
module signing from doing so?

josh

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/