Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.kernel > #90129 > unrolled thread

Re: Looking for feedback on CONFIG_MODULE_HASHES for Linux

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: Looking for feedback on CONFIG_MODULE_HASHES for Linux Fabian Grünbichler <debian@fabian.gruenbichler.email> - 2025-11-18 19:00 +0100
    Re: Looking for feedback on CONFIG_MODULE_HASHES for Linux Bastian Blank <waldi@debian.org> - 2025-11-22 17:00 +0100

#90129 — Re: Looking for feedback on CONFIG_MODULE_HASHES for Linux

CCing debian-kernel and one of the Debian kernel team members

On Thu, Nov 13, 2025, at 9:10 PM, Thomas Weißschuh via rb-general wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> I am the author of the CONFIG_MODULE_HASHES patchset [0] for the Linux kernel
> which aims to enable reproducible kernel packages for Linux distributions.
> My goal is to reignite development and continue with the upstream process.
> To have a better base to argue with I'd like to get some confirmation that
> distributions have looked at the patches and do intent to adapt this scheme when
> it is available in the mainline kernel. That should help me get some leverage
> with the upstream maintainers.
>
> The current form of the patches can be found at [1], they are only slightly
> adapted from the previous submission to LKML. Remaining open topics before the
> next submission are proper IMA support and stripping of modules.
> Future changes may introduce more hash algorithms and performance improvements,
> but these should not be relvant for now.
>
> So if you are packaging Linux for your distribution, have looked at my 
> patches
> and are eager to use them, please let me know. My plan is to talk with 
> the
> upstream maintainers at the upcoming Linux Plumbers Conference on 11th 
> of December.

Hi Thomas, Hi Bastian,

Given the recent discussion on IRC about this, I figured this might be
the easiest way to get the ball rolling on potentially getting this patch
series endorsed/.. by the Debian kernel team - or at least getting a
written expression of interest or further discussion :)

Thanks Thomas for continuing to work on this!

Cheers,
Fabian

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#90192

On Tue, Nov 18, 2025 at 06:32:35PM +0100, Fabian Grünbichler wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 13, 2025, at 9:10 PM, Thomas Weißschuh via rb-general wrote:
> > The current form of the patches can be found at [1], they are only slightly
> > adapted from the previous submission to LKML.

I'll try and take a look at those.

> > adapted from the previous submission to LKML. Remaining open topics before the
> > next submission are proper IMA support and stripping of modules.

Yeah, stripping is a critical feature.  My take on that would be
something like that:
- During the build process, not only link .ko, but also directly create
  the stripped version as maybe .ko.strip.
- INSTALL_MOD_STRIP will then only select which of the two files to
  install, not actually call strip.

As additional thing: To mimic the current behaviour of the Debian
package, where we don't sign the unstripped files shipped for debugging
help, we only want the stripped versions show up as hashes.  But this we
could do on our own.  In the end this may reduce the attack surface due
to a lot more debugging info.

> > So if you are packaging Linux for your distribution, have looked at my 
> > patches
> > and are eager to use them, please let me know. My plan is to talk with 
> > the
> > upstream maintainers at the upcoming Linux Plumbers Conference on 11th 
> > of December.
> Given the recent discussion on IRC about this, I figured this might be
> the easiest way to get the ball rolling on potentially getting this patch
> series endorsed/.. by the Debian kernel team - or at least getting a
> written expression of interest or further discussion :)

Thank you for bringing this up.  Yes, Debian is interested in this patch
set, so we can make our kernel builds reproducible again.

Bastian

-- 
We Klingons believe as you do -- the sick should die.  Only the strong
should live.
		-- Kras, "Friday's Child", stardate 3497.2

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.kernel

csiph-web