From owner-svn-src-head@freebsd.org Wed Jun 20 18:09:24 2018 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-src-head@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EECA31001C94; Wed, 20 Jun 2018 18:09:23 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from delphij@gmail.com) Received: from mail-it0-x230.google.com (mail-it0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c0b::230]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 68E046B3DE; Wed, 20 Jun 2018 18:09:23 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from delphij@gmail.com) Received: by mail-it0-x230.google.com with SMTP id a3-v6so963950itd.0; Wed, 20 Jun 2018 11:09:23 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=ZiFLRClMsk4szyaujuHDh9r9UuXc/VZu1vkha2Zj61A=; b=h7raXzBf622gxPbz3cyKg/t4AQqHyE+a8fydneQSEIKJWmI3wmc8JJpsu3FwnAvgrJ L4o3GcdFTSXUTk5tGbFEUiT2ZzVQLDWMobu3HjLZoH+IA9t9f3cLYtzpACwvF9mJnbU+ gPT86sqaFXK0Lhf8uALz63I+DrBM6KsHgu/nPim6cWqh4lDBt5/MquLbx3ZJX7cqRr2o GyUv0CsuAQbKnoNCCKGMmeb7CEw/DWjBeLi/ROvotWwTEiEfqCjBwnsrnJvIl4dnXsn3 uwOS8R5MmDKvfQogqb08t95+b5TkLe7Y7Rq4YqdO7nFSkewhURYIgIIT4yaJTXBpsfhS Hogw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=ZiFLRClMsk4szyaujuHDh9r9UuXc/VZu1vkha2Zj61A=; b=TCZSsChHc/6jBmHjHyDUMDgKHZK3avBfrTNN9hwXGd97xEKfSJM63XxNUm560EBrmX x92im6Z6D/vf926TWS2Hm3hSqR9Fs8DYJ5cXsFOgcIWq3wzO/WR1FyaYcLcGdEM+Dw4R DxQMqCNVOSGBniQX+16nbg2bknNCtCIzHGtvn/O5eXgDp0YOMNQXtCE6ndF6hpQlHDhR 1vn2JehASv6sCmrDC6Nuum5M+QBRBVDoUyO2KsOsG4xbxB5robENpqOm6pvE6Zhf8Wi2 dr3xBoRiR49c3EHjYR4LJHt7Da/y8hoWq1ikjJ1eb0yotMltTeq7eXZjNGs7DVXLXAxS zx2Q== X-Gm-Message-State: APt69E3kh+L51f6A92B57sCXBc4/Nhln0CSM1AKAkoZ+z9Ykrb9o4+E+ 99Cpic3MCLycCOz8Dg2dIPZ7PqgAE23+DNCltmqEJa+N X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpeHLvco/Rtkeo0ELwRP9kDFvMv0O54dEvdQtZ6HE8hvjZ7rHjD4gWX6eIq5WtqB/O1hWbcEBhJXhj13G47eThw= X-Received: by 2002:a24:ed4a:: with SMTP id r71-v6mr2443009ith.53.1529518162186; Wed, 20 Jun 2018 11:09:22 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <201806200108.w5K18sIR050132@repo.freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: From: Xin LI Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2018 11:09:10 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: svn commit: r335402 - head/sbin/veriexecctl To: "Jonathan T. Looney" Cc: Conrad Meyer , stevek@freebsd.org, "src-committers@freebsd.org" , "svn-src-all@freebsd.org" , "svn-src-head@freebsd.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-BeenThere: svn-src-head@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: SVN commit messages for the src tree for head/-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2018 18:09:24 -0000 On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 10:58 AM Jonathan T. Looney wrote= : > > On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 8:34 PM Conrad Meyer wrote: >> >> Please revert this patchset. It's not ready. > > > I'm not sure I understand the need to revert the patches. They may need s= ome refinement, but they also do provide some functionality upon which you = can build the tooling that Simon discussed. > > Unless I missed something, this feature only impacts the system when it i= s specifically compiled in. In cases like that, I think its reasonable to g= ive the committer some time to refine them in place prior to the code slush= /freeze, at which point we can decide what to do. +1 for all points. I do agree with others that SHA-1 support should not be included (unless I have missed something, but I think firmware integrity check counts as a "Digital signature" verification, according to SP 800-131A "9 Hash algorithms", SHA-1 verification should only be used for legacy usage, which does not apply on FreeBSD because this is new feature). But even that, given the code only impacts systems that have it explicitly compiled in, it's reasonable to give the committer more time to make further improvements rather than reverting it as a whole as this would give the code more exposure. Cheers,