Re: [PATCH v2] builddeb: Support signing kernels with the module signing key

[Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>]

On Wed, Jan 05, 2022 at 12:39:57AM +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
> > +vmlinux=$($MAKE -s -f $srctree/Makefile image_name)
> > +key=
> > +if is_enabled CONFIG_EFI_STUB && is_enabled CONFIG_MODULE_SIG; then
> > +       cert=$(grep ^CONFIG_MODULE_SIG_KEY= include/config/auto.conf | cut -d\" -f2)
> > +       if [ ! -f $cert ]; then
> > +               cert=$srctree/$cert
> > +       fi
> > +
> > +       key=${cert%pem}priv
> > +       if [ ! -f $key ]; then
> > +               key=$cert
> > +       fi
> 
> 
> I still do not understand this part.
> 
> It is true that the Debian document you referred to creates separate files
> for the key and the certificate:
>   # openssl req -new -x509 -newkey rsa:2048 -keyout MOK.priv -outform
> DER -out MOK.der -days 36500 -subj "/CN=My Name/" -nodes
> 
> but, is such a use-case possible in Kbuild?

If someone has followed the Debian instructions for creating a MOK,
then they will have two separate files.  We should support both the case
where someone has created a Debian MOK and the case where someone has
used Kbuild to create this foolish blob with both private and public
key in one file.

> In the old days, yes, the key and the certificate were stored in separate files.
> (the key in *.priv and the certificate in *.x509)
> 
> 
> Please read this commit:

Yes, I did.

> The motivation for this change is still questionable to me;
> the commit description sounds like they merged *.priv and *.x509
> into *.pem just because they could not write a correct Makefile.
> (If requested, I can write a correct Makefile that works in parallel build)

I think that would be preferable.  Putting the private and public keys
in the same file cannot be good security practice!