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


Groups > linux.kernel > #1353100

Re: [RFC PATCH 11/12] certs: Add a secondary system keyring that can be added to dynamically [ver #2]

From Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Newsgroups linux.kernel
Subject Re: [RFC PATCH 11/12] certs: Add a secondary system keyring that can be added to dynamically [ver #2]
Date 2016-03-08 15:40 +0100
Message-ID <raqXL-25J-3@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References <raffX-2Pc-5@gated-at.bofh.it> <r8ZwB-8vJ-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <r8ZwC-8vJ-33@gated-at.bofh.it> <rapIn-1lO-23@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw


On Tue, 2016-03-08 at 13:13 +0000, David Howells wrote:
> Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> 
> > but we're left with a lot of references to "system_trusted" (eg.
> > restrict_link_to_system_trusted, depends on SYSTEM_TRUSTED_KEYRING
> 
> How about I pluralise it to SYSTEM_TRUSTED_KEYRINGS?  The fact that one is
> called builtin and the other secondary doesn't detract from the fact that
> they're both system-wide rings of trusted keys.

Would then restrict_link_to_system_trusted imply both the builtin and
secondary keyrings or just the builtin keyrings?   Changing the system
keyring name to builtin keys, without changing the corresponding
restrict_link name, obfuscates what is really happening.

Mimi

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | NextPrevious in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

[RFC PATCH 00/12] KEYS: Restrict additions to 'trusted' keyrings  [ver #2] David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com> - 2016-03-04 16:10 +0100
  [RFC PATCH 04/12] KEYS: Move x509_request_asymmetric_key() to  asymmetric_type.c [ver #2] David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com> - 2016-03-04 16:10 +0100
  [RFC PATCH 12/12] IMA: Use the the system trusted keyrings instead  of .ima_mok [ver #2] David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com> - 2016-03-04 16:10 +0100
    Re: [RFC PATCH 12/12] IMA: Use the the system trusted keyrings  instead of .ima_mok [ver #2] Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2016-03-08 03:30 +0100
      Re: [RFC PATCH 12/12] IMA: Use the the system trusted keyrings instead of .ima_mok [ver #2] David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com> - 2016-03-08 14:10 +0100
        Re: [RFC PATCH 12/12] IMA: Use the the system trusted keyrings  instead of .ima_mok [ver #2] Petko Manolov <petkan@mip-labs.com> - 2016-03-08 15:20 +0100
          Re: [RFC PATCH 12/12] IMA: Use the the system trusted keyrings  instead of .ima_mok [ver #2] Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2016-03-08 15:40 +0100
          Re: [RFC PATCH 12/12] IMA: Use the the system trusted keyrings instead of .ima_mok [ver #2] David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com> - 2016-03-08 15:50 +0100
            Re: [RFC PATCH 12/12] IMA: Use the the system trusted keyrings  instead of .ima_mok [ver #2] Petko Manolov <petkan@mip-labs.com> - 2016-03-08 16:50 +0100
          Re: [RFC PATCH 12/12] IMA: Use the the system trusted keyrings instead of .ima_mok [ver #2] David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com> - 2016-03-08 17:10 +0100
            Re: [RFC PATCH 12/12] IMA: Use the the system trusted keyrings  instead of .ima_mok [ver #2] Petko Manolov <petkan@mip-labs.com> - 2016-03-08 17:40 +0100
              Re: [RFC PATCH 12/12] IMA: Use the the system trusted keyrings  instead of .ima_mok [ver #2] Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2016-03-08 23:10 +0100
        Re: [RFC PATCH 12/12] IMA: Use the the system trusted keyrings  instead of .ima_mok [ver #2] Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2016-03-08 15:20 +0100
  [RFC PATCH 07/12] X.509: Move the trust validation code out to its  own file [ver #2] David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com> - 2016-03-04 16:10 +0100
  [RFC PATCH 11/12] certs: Add a secondary system keyring that can be  added to dynamically [ver #2] David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com> - 2016-03-04 16:10 +0100
    Re: [RFC PATCH 11/12] certs: Add a secondary system keyring that  can be added to dynamically [ver #2] Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2016-03-08 03:10 +0100
      Re: [RFC PATCH 11/12] certs: Add a secondary system keyring that can be added to dynamically [ver #2] David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com> - 2016-03-08 14:20 +0100
        Re: [RFC PATCH 11/12] certs: Add a secondary system keyring that can  be added to dynamically [ver #2] Petko Manolov <petkan@mip-labs.com> - 2016-03-08 15:20 +0100
        Re: [RFC PATCH 11/12] certs: Add a secondary system keyring that  can be added to dynamically [ver #2] Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2016-03-08 15:40 +0100
          Re: [RFC PATCH 11/12] certs: Add a secondary system keyring that can be added to dynamically [ver #2] David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com> - 2016-03-08 15:50 +0100
            Re: [RFC PATCH 11/12] certs: Add a secondary system keyring that  can be added to dynamically [ver #2] Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2016-03-08 16:10 +0100
              Re: [RFC PATCH 11/12] certs: Add a secondary system keyring that can be added to dynamically [ver #2] David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com> - 2016-03-08 16:40 +0100
                Re: [RFC PATCH 11/12] certs: Add a secondary system keyring that  can be added to dynamically [ver #2] Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2016-03-08 17:20 +0100
  [RFC PATCH 05/12] KEYS: Generalise x509_request_asymmetric_key()  [ver #2] David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com> - 2016-03-04 16:10 +0100
  [RFC PATCH 09/12] KEYS: Move the point of trust determination to  __key_link() [ver #2] David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com> - 2016-03-04 16:10 +0100
  [RFC PATCH 02/12] PKCS#7: Make trust determination dependent on  contents of trust keyring [ver #2] David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com> - 2016-03-04 16:10 +0100
  [RFC PATCH 06/12] X.509: Use verify_signature() if we have a struct  key * to use [ver #2] David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com> - 2016-03-04 16:10 +0100
  [RFC PATCH 10/12] KEYS: Remove KEY_FLAG_TRUSTED and  KEY_ALLOC_TRUSTED [ver #2] David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com> - 2016-03-04 16:10 +0100

csiph-web