* Module signing broken after SYSTEM_DATA_VERIFICATION commit?
@ 2015-08-28 2:38 Valdis Kletnieks
2015-08-28 10:15 ` David Howells
2015-08-28 10:23 ` David Howells
0 siblings, 2 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Valdis Kletnieks @ 2015-08-28 2:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: David Howells, David Woodhouse; +Cc: linux-kernel
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 805 bytes --]
I build kernels with MODULE_SIG=y, MODULE_SIG_FORCE=n (for build and run
coverage, but it shouldn't dork my system if it breaks). next-20150810
works just fine, but next-20150826 breaks modprobe - all calls to it
drop this in the dmesg:
[ 31.829322] PKCS7: Unknown OID: [32] 2.16.840.1.101.3.4.2.3
[ 31.829328] PKCS7: Unknown OID: [180] 2.16.840.1.101.3.4.2.3
[ 31.829330] Unsupported digest algo: 55
and the modprobe fails.
This looks like the most suspicious commit in the area:
commit 091f6e26eb326adbd718f406e440c838bed8ebb6
Author: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
Date: Mon Jul 20 21:16:28 2015 +0100
MODSIGN: Extract the blob PKCS#7 signature verifier from module signing
though it could be something else equally recent. Is this ringing any
bells, or should I go bisect it?
[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 848 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread* Re: Module signing broken after SYSTEM_DATA_VERIFICATION commit?
2015-08-28 2:38 Module signing broken after SYSTEM_DATA_VERIFICATION commit? Valdis Kletnieks
@ 2015-08-28 10:15 ` David Howells
2015-08-28 10:23 ` David Howells
1 sibling, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: David Howells @ 2015-08-28 10:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Valdis Kletnieks; +Cc: dhowells, David Woodhouse, linux-kernel
Valdis Kletnieks <Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu> wrote:
> I build kernels with MODULE_SIG=y, MODULE_SIG_FORCE=n (for build and run
> coverage, but it shouldn't dork my system if it breaks). next-20150810
> works just fine, but next-20150826 breaks modprobe - all calls to it
> drop this in the dmesg:
Could I have a look at your .config?
David
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: Module signing broken after SYSTEM_DATA_VERIFICATION commit?
2015-08-28 2:38 Module signing broken after SYSTEM_DATA_VERIFICATION commit? Valdis Kletnieks
2015-08-28 10:15 ` David Howells
@ 2015-08-28 10:23 ` David Howells
2015-08-28 21:09 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
1 sibling, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: David Howells @ 2015-08-28 10:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Valdis Kletnieks; +Cc: dhowells, David Woodhouse, linux-kernel
Valdis Kletnieks <Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu> wrote:
> [ 31.829322] PKCS7: Unknown OID: [32] 2.16.840.1.101.3.4.2.3
> [ 31.829328] PKCS7: Unknown OID: [180] 2.16.840.1.101.3.4.2.3
OID_sha1, /* 1.3.14.3.2.26 */
OID_sha256, /* 2.16.840.1.101.3.4.2.1 */
I suspect I'm missing something here in oid_registry.h. Looking online, I
see:
id-sha256 OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { hashAlgs 1 }
id-sha384 OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { hashAlgs 2 }
id-sha512 OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { hashAlgs 3 }
id-sha224 OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { hashAlgs 4 }
id-sha512-224 OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { hashAlgs 5 }
id-sha512-256 OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { hashAlgs 6 }
Are you perchance using sha512 hashes in your signatures?
David
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread* Re: Module signing broken after SYSTEM_DATA_VERIFICATION commit?
2015-08-28 10:23 ` David Howells
@ 2015-08-28 21:09 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Valdis.Kletnieks @ 2015-08-28 21:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: David Howells; +Cc: David Woodhouse, linux-kernel
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1164 bytes --]
On Fri, 28 Aug 2015 11:23:54 +0100, David Howells said:
> Valdis Kletnieks <Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu> wrote:
>
> > [ 31.829322] PKCS7: Unknown OID: [32] 2.16.840.1.101.3.4.2.3
> > [ 31.829328] PKCS7: Unknown OID: [180] 2.16.840.1.101.3.4.2.3
>
> OID_sha1, /* 1.3.14.3.2.26 */
> OID_sha256, /* 2.16.840.1.101.3.4.2.1 */
>
> I suspect I'm missing something here in oid_registry.h. Looking online, I
> see:
>
> id-sha256 OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { hashAlgs 1 }
> id-sha384 OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { hashAlgs 2 }
> id-sha512 OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { hashAlgs 3 }
> id-sha224 OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { hashAlgs 4 }
> id-sha512-224 OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { hashAlgs 5 }
> id-sha512-256 OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { hashAlgs 6 }
>
> Are you perchance using sha512 hashes in your signatures?
% grep MODULE_SIG /usr/src/linux-next/.config
CONFIG_MODULE_SIG=y
# CONFIG_MODULE_SIG_FORCE is not set
CONFIG_MODULE_SIG_ALL=y
# CONFIG_MODULE_SIG_SHA1 is not set
# CONFIG_MODULE_SIG_SHA224 is not set
# CONFIG_MODULE_SIG_SHA256 is not set
# CONFIG_MODULE_SIG_SHA384 is not set
CONFIG_MODULE_SIG_SHA512=y
CONFIG_MODULE_SIG_HASH="sha512"
CONFIG_MODULE_SIG_KEY="signing_key.pem"
[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 848 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2015-08-28 21:09 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2015-08-28 2:38 Module signing broken after SYSTEM_DATA_VERIFICATION commit? Valdis Kletnieks
2015-08-28 10:15 ` David Howells
2015-08-28 10:23 ` David Howells
2015-08-28 21:09 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®