[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: kernel module loading vs securelevel
On Sun, Oct 17, 2010 at 04:04:59PM -0400, Matthew Mondor wrote:
> On Sat, 16 Oct 2010 13:58:19 -0400
> Thor Lancelot Simon <tls%panix.com@localhost> wrote:
> > 2) Finish the asymmetric operation support in cryptodev and
> > actually require modules to be signed. This is basically a
> > superset of #1 above that could get about as complicated as
> > one wanted it to (ugh) but might be worthwhile if kept simple.
> You seem to now agree with me that this could be a solution. It
> indeed requires more work, but it also has advantages: not having to
Let me know when you've got the code ready for review.
Main Index |
Thread Index |