From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8F0942066C9; Fri, 10 Jan 2025 19:16:42 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1736536602; cv=none; b=eo94zJlVCRfdA/zHhNR9OxuU7NKb0X4KGJfkCNGrxfMgHVxyVijhtm+4OumV5PL4nx+nOT9CiBZ4K8NLeW4QHw9qDTvd8pt3y5eymuIQeuFU9zP4BcfyvodHwu3HHHNTl99G2q76mPconj1Pj/Wih4JiUyllLgdOw884UQWH12U= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1736536602; c=relaxed/simple; bh=sfn3yOFMuAextGzWHj4juuUKpN4aPNdOVMwP5bH8vHM=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=V5EhIgxJcsD/hafQ6yNof4dfZEUDfNe9etIgkR6CMUovQHPbKiAGd9+83U+Fv/egOKnKR59etth1Zj3VXht/D7wgFZN/izgjG554yjh80hOMyTB4TKPlo+BbZA2SRF8V4SR8I4de4qg2/OtAR2HDuZWGS3ZRXxTNwrdJWp/4P48= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=tkGMxF94; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="tkGMxF94" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BE36CC4CED6; Fri, 10 Jan 2025 19:16:41 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1736536602; bh=sfn3yOFMuAextGzWHj4juuUKpN4aPNdOVMwP5bH8vHM=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=tkGMxF94g6FPah/+OxXGQP1MttsGxoeyi7qi9JvNIIIer94PjOrzgJDRXZcC8hRCu LYwL9WlMkZSampb7+E0QtqPEP47VzNIQGMefPcF/Byc5ezlCufHaPNVvmuTU/G2Mx6 /BVcRDX4J0Lq8QlLhLe9qDglEFeglzOhuSispuaGr6cKE43klokd08zJky1JZI6Zsi 3iYEsWr3dc8J9NwkV7mBYI3cp7il5RWmNp1g9UNRWzf/0qa7MnYEkFtaBKJEGQ14Tg 823WI75+hXooV7yHfIHgbOEj1pRaNaRRNpMeL+HrHG0cknCOf2v7mHH29DSEn5yeZ4 t2K4PXFj4wTPQ== Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2025 11:16:40 -0800 From: Luis Chamberlain To: Arnout Engelen Cc: linux@weissschuh.net, arnd@arndb.de, da.gomez@samsung.com, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-modules@vger.kernel.org, masahiroy@kernel.org, nathan@kernel.org, nicolas@fjasle.eu, petr.pavlu@suse.com, samitolvanen@google.com Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 2/2] module: Introduce hash-based integrity checking Message-ID: References: <20241225-module-hashes-v1-2-d710ce7a3fd1@weissschuh.net> <20250109105227.1012778-1-arnout@bzzt.net> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20250109105227.1012778-1-arnout@bzzt.net> On Thu, Jan 09, 2025 at 11:52:27AM +0100, Arnout Engelen wrote: > On Fri, 3 Jan 2025 17:37:52 -0800, Luis Chamberlain wrote: > > What distro which is using module signatures would switch > > to this as an alternative instead? > > In NixOS, we disable MODULE_SIG by default (because we value > reproducibility over having module signatures). Enabling > MODULE_HASHES on systems that do not need to load out-of-tree > modules would be a good step forward. > Mentioning this in the cover letter will also be good. So two distros seemt to want this. Luis