Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2015 22:32:32 -0300 From: Pedro Arthur <bygrandao@gmail.com> To: Xin LI <d@delphij.net> Cc: "<freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>" <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>, John-Mark Gurney <jmg@funkthat.com> Subject: Re: GELI support on /boot folder Message-ID: <CAKN1MR4EUxNyHcoX7N_Xh2WGept1CfKUaU=2UC3MOr5xQ%2B3U=w@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <55159CF0.9060700@delphij.net> References: <CAKN1MR54TCWZa_wSLAe63fxVF6248yr_aKkg-T0WtxHzaiLkyw@mail.gmail.com> <20150319013231.GR51048@funkthat.com> <55149E70.30608@delphij.net> <CAKN1MR5ghmoNn30=mvXwf89LYd9HhTALGXziMrxMct62W48r-w@mail.gmail.com> <55159CF0.9060700@delphij.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Disregard this boot2 comment, it has nothing to do with the gptboot 2015-03-27 15:09 GMT-03:00 Xin Li <delphij@delphij.net>: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA512 > > On 03/26/15 19:56, Pedro Arthur wrote: > > I think that encrypting the boot folder will protect the boot > > configurations, kernel and kernel modules from being changed. > > I see... Have you considered other approaches for this goal, for > instance verifying signature? (But to make it useful, we still need > something in the BIOS/EFI to enforce the integrity of the boot code > itself). > > >> If we make changes to loader more often, it could be a bad idea > >> because merging both parties would make it harder for those who > >> develop loader changes. > >> > >> Additionally, it may be desirable to keep different copies of > >> loaders in different "boot environment" datasets, it's more > >> convenient for debugging: let's say one developer decided to make > >> some changes to ZFS support of loader, and that's installed to a > >> new boot environment, then they can try it out without making a > >> usable boot disk at hand before hand. Once the zfsloader is > >> proven to be working (we still have zfsloader.old or a different > >> boot environment available), we would have much more confident > >> that the system will boot after a gptzfsboot update because they > >> share the same code. > >> > >> I agree with you, but the boot2 has already reached its size > >> limit.For > > example if you try to compile the boot2 with clang < 3.5 (>=3.5 > > uses the enable-gvn flag) you will get an error saying boot2 > > exceeded its max size by ~20 bytes. I can't see other way to do it > > without merging. > > Hmm I don't quite follow -- we were discussing about whether to merge > gpt[zfs]boot with [zfs]loader, right? > > (I don't have strong opinion on whether we merge or not merge the two, > just would like to point out the pro/cons). > > Cheers, > - -- > Xin LI <delphij@delphij.net> https://www.delphij.net/ > FreeBSD - The Power to Serve! Live free or die > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v2.1.2 (FreeBSD) > > iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJVFZztAAoJEJW2GBstM+nsBLUP/RuzlcrJ6+WW3h5vUF0gNwb+ > zEv/WAPtiH6pZIgcUmUkL2F4icKEiEknoTgPhObpgARGPx4xrm7pYHZ4Zsule/MS > KYE3Sys8eLwIONHSBl1sHJ3WV8K/Jv+buwRDWXsmwtjH8e7C5yxrmuytp4XJ4Lxp > pRIqNJmfdPJOI1bNMJCI4sPNHo/1pnxQGNTN2vxJAdjSzgh9FvIiH00CyHm+r23z > ZCQn1aAGded2Rnv4boG0EPklKQA38GG8kHdtQVaLySDZL13BvHFbF0P09b/1m0I7 > TXypho3xgHEI2vVDiLPPIgFdnFm95AJ2ibVu5UP3g+4iqiGMSwtq7XYZRnDIGVJ5 > MxZdgTgf1c7tvmf8SoQLFnfDVi8RfVzh+CpmbWr7+KotuW3BMfOgd20V2z/ItDhF > 9ptZDPUILrqEUL127HwSMENX8mwLmMDo14lPzRtan7YfoIgNMgAh0B0ZwP5Ow0yO > txsJ8/YQYgcCOP3sQinyu+OV3OD91qlK0OBIePrqX8eP5jI1paflXElikWhEYjvi > pNO2c+HenFm09OGGaW5PrHvIk4fjknkpq0ndwS2a8dSQS2zFaEvfzvKvoCr2x7Lh > KtTzdGrORXdYelHndeMg8dh9LXDWEQgNdWBNP+xKnL23xaXcVWo8qgWpLM4RIc72 > uGDJqiUysU9rDEf3oq7z > =H1bs > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAKN1MR4EUxNyHcoX7N_Xh2WGept1CfKUaU=2UC3MOr5xQ%2B3U=w>