Re: execution policy for shells

[Thor Lancelot Simon <tls%panix.com@localhost>]

On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 03:06:39PM -0400, Jan Schaumann wrote:
> Thor Lancelot Simon <tls%panix.com@localhost> wrote:
>  
> > So you need the shell to be the thing whose fingerprint is known to the
> > kernel
> 
> Yes.
> 
> >, and the interpreted scripts to be known to the shell.
> 
> I'd like to avoid having to know in advance the scripts the shell might
> run.  I'd rather say "only run a scrip -- any script -- if it's signed
> by X".

I think you're not really getting my operative definition of "known to".

It's a lot easier to validate a RSA signature in the shell than in the
kernel (though if you want to implement software public key operations
in /dev/crypto be my guest).

-- 
Thor Lancelot Simon                                    
tls%rek.tjls.com@localhost
  "All of my opinions are consistent, but I cannot present them all
   at once."    -Jean-Jacques Rousseau, On The Social Contract