On Fri, Mar 21, 2025 at 5:21 PM Eric Snowberg wrote:
> > On Mar 21, 2025, at 12:57 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
> ...
> > , but I will note that I don't recall you offering to step
> > up and maintain Lockdown anywhere in this thread.
>
> I didn't realize that trying to contribute a new LSM and being wi
On Fri, Mar 21, 2025 at 12:37 PM Eric Snowberg wrote:
> > On Mar 20, 2025, at 3:36 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 20, 2025 at 12:29 PM Eric Snowberg
> > wrote:
> >>> On Mar 6, 2025, at 7:46 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
> >>> On March 6, 2025 5:29:36 PM Eric Snowberg
> >>> wrote:
> >
> > ...
> On Mar 21, 2025, at 2:53 PM, James Bottomley
> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2025-03-21 at 20:15 +, Eric Snowberg wrote:
>>> On Mar 21, 2025, at 10:55 AM, James Bottomley
>>> wrote:
> [...]
Hopefully that is not the case, since the public key ships on
just about every single PC built.
On Fri, Mar 21, 2025 at 1:22 PM Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 20, 2025 at 05:36:41PM -0400, Paul Moore wrote:
...
> > I want to address two things, the first, and most important, is that
> > while I am currently employed by Microsoft, I do not speak for
> > Microsoft and the decisions and
On March 21, 2025 6:56:53 PM Eric Snowberg wrote:
On Mar 21, 2025, at 4:13 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
On Fri, Mar 21, 2025 at 5:21 PM Eric Snowberg wrote:
On Mar 21, 2025, at 12:57 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
...
, but I will note that I don't recall you offering to step
up and maintain Lockdown any
> On Mar 21, 2025, at 4:13 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
>
> On Fri, Mar 21, 2025 at 5:21 PM Eric Snowberg
> wrote:
>>> On Mar 21, 2025, at 12:57 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
>> ...
>>> , but I will note that I don't recall you offering to step
>>> up and maintain Lockdown anywhere in this thread.
>>
>> I
> On Mar 21, 2025, at 12:57 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
...
> , but I will note that I don't recall you offering to step
> up and maintain Lockdown anywhere in this thread.
I didn't realize that trying to contribute a new LSM and being willing to
be the maintainer of it also involved stepping up t
On Fri, 2025-03-21 at 20:15 +, Eric Snowberg wrote:
> > On Mar 21, 2025, at 10:55 AM, James Bottomley
> > wrote:
[...]
> > > Hopefully that is not the case, since the public key ships on
> > > just about every single PC built.
> >
> > I don't understand why Microsoft no-longer owning the p
> On Mar 21, 2025, at 10:55 AM, James Bottomley
> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2025-03-21 at 16:40 +, Eric Snowberg wrote:
>>> On Mar 20, 2025, at 4:40 PM, James Bottomley
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Thu, 2025-03-20 at 16:24 +, Eric Snowberg wrote:
Having lockdown enforcement has always been
>
> On Mar 20, 2025, at 3:36 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
>
> On Thu, Mar 20, 2025 at 12:29 PM Eric Snowberg
> wrote:
>>> On Mar 6, 2025, at 7:46 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
>>> On March 6, 2025 5:29:36 PM Eric Snowberg wrote:
>
> ...
>
Does this mean Microsoft will begin signing shims in the futur
On Fri, 2025-03-21 at 16:40 +, Eric Snowberg wrote:
> > On Mar 20, 2025, at 4:40 PM, James Bottomley
> > wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 2025-03-20 at 16:24 +, Eric Snowberg wrote:
> > > Having lockdown enforcement has always been
> > > a requirement to get a shim signed by Microsoft.
> >
> > Th
On Thu, Mar 20, 2025 at 05:36:41PM -0400, Paul Moore wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 20, 2025 at 12:29 PM Eric Snowberg
> wrote:
> > > On Mar 6, 2025, at 7:46 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
> > > On March 6, 2025 5:29:36 PM Eric Snowberg
> > > wrote:
>
> ...
>
> > >> Does this mean Microsoft will begin signing
On Thu, Mar 20, 2025 at 06:40:55PM -0400, James Bottomley wrote:
> On Thu, 2025-03-20 at 16:24 +, Eric Snowberg wrote:
> > Having lockdown enforcement has always been
> > a requirement to get a shim signed by Microsoft.
>
> This is factually incorrect. Microsoft transferred shim signing to a
> On Mar 20, 2025, at 4:40 PM, James Bottomley
> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 2025-03-20 at 16:24 +, Eric Snowberg wrote:
>> Having lockdown enforcement has always been
>> a requirement to get a shim signed by Microsoft.
>
> This is factually incorrect. Microsoft transferred shim signing to an
>
On Thu, 2025-03-20 at 16:24 +, Eric Snowberg wrote:
> Having lockdown enforcement has always been
> a requirement to get a shim signed by Microsoft.
This is factually incorrect. Microsoft transferred shim signing to an
independent process run by a group of open source maintainers a while
ago
> On Mar 6, 2025, at 7:46 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
>
> On March 6, 2025 5:29:36 PM Eric Snowberg wrote:
>>> On Mar 5, 2025, at 6:12 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wed, Mar 5, 2025 at 4:30 PM Eric Snowberg
>>> wrote:
> On Mar 4, 2025, at 5:23 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 4, 2
On Thu, Mar 20, 2025 at 12:29 PM Eric Snowberg wrote:
> > On Mar 6, 2025, at 7:46 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
> > On March 6, 2025 5:29:36 PM Eric Snowberg wrote:
...
> >> Does this mean Microsoft will begin signing shims in the future without
> >> the lockdown requirement?
> >
> > That's not a ques
On March 6, 2025 5:29:36 PM Eric Snowberg wrote:
On Mar 5, 2025, at 6:12 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
On Wed, Mar 5, 2025 at 4:30 PM Eric Snowberg wrote:
On Mar 4, 2025, at 5:23 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
On Tue, Mar 4, 2025 at 9:47 AM Eric Snowberg wrote:
On Mar 3, 2025, at 3:40 PM, Paul Moore wrot
> On Mar 5, 2025, at 6:12 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
>
> On Wed, Mar 5, 2025 at 4:30 PM Eric Snowberg wrote:
>>> On Mar 4, 2025, at 5:23 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
>>> On Tue, Mar 4, 2025 at 9:47 AM Eric Snowberg
>>> wrote:
> On Mar 3, 2025, at 3:40 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 28, 20
On Wed, Mar 5, 2025 at 4:30 PM Eric Snowberg wrote:
> > On Mar 4, 2025, at 5:23 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 4, 2025 at 9:47 AM Eric Snowberg
> > wrote:
> >>> On Mar 3, 2025, at 3:40 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
> >>> On Fri, Feb 28, 2025 at 12:52 PM Eric Snowberg
> >>> wrote:
> > On F
> On Mar 4, 2025, at 5:23 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
>
> On Tue, Mar 4, 2025 at 9:47 AM Eric Snowberg wrote:
>>> On Mar 3, 2025, at 3:40 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
>>> On Fri, Feb 28, 2025 at 12:52 PM Eric Snowberg
>>> wrote:
> On Feb 28, 2025, at 9:14 AM, Paul Moore wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 28,
On Tue, Mar 4, 2025 at 5:25 PM Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 03, 2025 at 05:40:54PM -0500, Paul Moore wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 28, 2025 at 12:52 PM Eric Snowberg
> > wrote:
> > > > On Feb 28, 2025, at 9:14 AM, Paul Moore wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Feb 28, 2025 at 9:09 AM Mimi Zohar wrote:
> >
On Tue, Mar 4, 2025 at 9:20 PM Mimi Zohar wrote:
> On Tue, 2025-03-04 at 21:09 -0500, Paul Moore wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 4, 2025 at 8:50 PM Mimi Zohar wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2025-03-04 at 19:19 -0500, Paul Moore wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Mar 4, 2025 at 7:54 AM Mimi Zohar wrote:
> > > > > On Mon, 2025-
On Tue, 2025-03-04 at 21:09 -0500, Paul Moore wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 4, 2025 at 8:50 PM Mimi Zohar wrote:
> > On Tue, 2025-03-04 at 19:19 -0500, Paul Moore wrote:
> > > On Tue, Mar 4, 2025 at 7:54 AM Mimi Zohar wrote:
> > > > On Mon, 2025-03-03 at 17:38 -0500, Paul Moore wrote:
> > > > > On Fri, Fe
On Tue, Mar 4, 2025 at 8:50 PM Mimi Zohar wrote:
> On Tue, 2025-03-04 at 19:19 -0500, Paul Moore wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 4, 2025 at 7:54 AM Mimi Zohar wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2025-03-03 at 17:38 -0500, Paul Moore wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Feb 28, 2025 at 12:19 PM Mimi Zohar wrote:
> > > > > On Fri, 202
On Tue, 2025-03-04 at 19:19 -0500, Paul Moore wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 4, 2025 at 7:54 AM Mimi Zohar wrote:
> > On Mon, 2025-03-03 at 17:38 -0500, Paul Moore wrote:
> > > On Fri, Feb 28, 2025 at 12:19 PM Mimi Zohar wrote:
> > > > On Fri, 2025-02-28 at 11:14 -0500, Paul Moore wrote:
> > > > > On Fri,
On Tue, Mar 04, 2025 at 07:25:13PM -0500, Paul Moore wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 4, 2025 at 5:25 PM Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 03, 2025 at 05:40:54PM -0500, Paul Moore wrote:
> > > On Fri, Feb 28, 2025 at 12:52 PM Eric Snowberg
> > > wrote:
> > > > > On Feb 28, 2025, at 9:14 AM, Paul Moore
On Tue, Mar 4, 2025 at 9:47 AM Eric Snowberg wrote:
> > On Mar 3, 2025, at 3:40 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 28, 2025 at 12:52 PM Eric Snowberg
> > wrote:
> >>> On Feb 28, 2025, at 9:14 AM, Paul Moore wrote:
> >>> On Fri, Feb 28, 2025 at 9:09 AM Mimi Zohar wrote:
> On Thu, 2025-
On Tue, Mar 4, 2025 at 7:54 AM Mimi Zohar wrote:
> On Mon, 2025-03-03 at 17:38 -0500, Paul Moore wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 28, 2025 at 12:19 PM Mimi Zohar wrote:
> > > On Fri, 2025-02-28 at 11:14 -0500, Paul Moore wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Feb 28, 2025 at 9:09 AM Mimi Zohar wrote:
> > > > > On Thu, 20
On Mon, Mar 03, 2025 at 05:40:54PM -0500, Paul Moore wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 28, 2025 at 12:52 PM Eric Snowberg
> wrote:
> > > On Feb 28, 2025, at 9:14 AM, Paul Moore wrote:
> > > On Fri, Feb 28, 2025 at 9:09 AM Mimi Zohar wrote:
> > >> On Thu, 2025-02-27 at 17:22 -0500, Paul Moore wrote:
> > >>>
> On Mar 3, 2025, at 3:40 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
>
> On Fri, Feb 28, 2025 at 12:52 PM Eric Snowberg
> wrote:
>>> On Feb 28, 2025, at 9:14 AM, Paul Moore wrote:
>>> On Fri, Feb 28, 2025 at 9:09 AM Mimi Zohar wrote:
On Thu, 2025-02-27 at 17:22 -0500, Paul Moore wrote:
>
> I'd sti
On Mon, 2025-03-03 at 17:38 -0500, Paul Moore wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 28, 2025 at 12:19 PM Mimi Zohar wrote:
> > On Fri, 2025-02-28 at 11:14 -0500, Paul Moore wrote:
> > > On Fri, Feb 28, 2025 at 9:09 AM Mimi Zohar wrote:
> > > > On Thu, 2025-02-27 at 17:22 -0500, Paul Moore wrote:
>
> ...
>
> > O
On Fri, Feb 28, 2025 at 12:52 PM Eric Snowberg wrote:
> > On Feb 28, 2025, at 9:14 AM, Paul Moore wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 28, 2025 at 9:09 AM Mimi Zohar wrote:
> >> On Thu, 2025-02-27 at 17:22 -0500, Paul Moore wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I'd still also like to see some discussion about moving towards the
On Fri, Feb 28, 2025 at 12:19 PM Mimi Zohar wrote:
> On Fri, 2025-02-28 at 11:14 -0500, Paul Moore wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 28, 2025 at 9:09 AM Mimi Zohar wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2025-02-27 at 17:22 -0500, Paul Moore wrote:
...
> Ok, let's go through different scenarios to see if it would scale.
>
>
On Thu, Feb 27, 2025 at 03:41:18PM -0500, Mimi Zohar wrote:
> On Mon, 2025-01-06 at 17:15 +, Eric Snowberg wrote:
> >
> > > On Jan 5, 2025, at 8:40 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, Jan 3, 2025 at 11:48 PM Paul Moore wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Regardless, back to Clavis ... reading qui
On Thu, Feb 27, 2025 at 05:22:22PM -0500, Paul Moore wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 27, 2025 at 3:41 PM Mimi Zohar wrote:
> > On Mon, 2025-01-06 at 17:15 +, Eric Snowberg wrote:
> > > > On Jan 5, 2025, at 8:40 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Jan 3, 2025 at 11:48 PM Paul Moore wrote:
> > > > >
>
> On Feb 28, 2025, at 9:14 AM, Paul Moore wrote:
>
> On Fri, Feb 28, 2025 at 9:09 AM Mimi Zohar wrote:
>> On Thu, 2025-02-27 at 17:22 -0500, Paul Moore wrote:
>>>
>>> I'd still also like to see some discussion about moving towards the
>>> addition of keyrings oriented towards usage instead of
On Fri, 2025-02-28 at 11:14 -0500, Paul Moore wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 28, 2025 at 9:09 AM Mimi Zohar wrote:
> > On Thu, 2025-02-27 at 17:22 -0500, Paul Moore wrote:
> > >
> > > I'd still also like to see some discussion about moving towards the
> > > addition of keyrings oriented towards usage inste
On Fri, Feb 28, 2025 at 9:09 AM Mimi Zohar wrote:
> On Thu, 2025-02-27 at 17:22 -0500, Paul Moore wrote:
> >
> > I'd still also like to see some discussion about moving towards the
> > addition of keyrings oriented towards usage instead of limiting
> > ourselves to keyrings that are oriented on th
On Thu, 2025-02-27 at 17:22 -0500, Paul Moore wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 27, 2025 at 3:41 PM Mimi Zohar wrote:
> > On Mon, 2025-01-06 at 17:15 +, Eric Snowberg wrote:
> > > > On Jan 5, 2025, at 8:40 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Jan 3, 2025 at 11:48 PM Paul Moore wrote:
> > > > >
> > > >
On Thu, Feb 27, 2025 at 3:41 PM Mimi Zohar wrote:
> On Mon, 2025-01-06 at 17:15 +, Eric Snowberg wrote:
> > > On Jan 5, 2025, at 8:40 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
> > > On Fri, Jan 3, 2025 at 11:48 PM Paul Moore wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Regardless, back to Clavis ... reading quickly through the cover
On Mon, 2025-01-06 at 17:15 +, Eric Snowberg wrote:
>
> > On Jan 5, 2025, at 8:40 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 3, 2025 at 11:48 PM Paul Moore wrote:
> > >
> > > Regardless, back to Clavis ... reading quickly through the cover
> > > letter again, I do somewhat wonder if this is
On Fri, Jan 3, 2025 at 6:14 PM Eric Snowberg wrote:
> > On Dec 23, 2024, at 5:09 AM, Mimi Zohar wrote:
...
> > My main concern is not with Clavis per-se, but that the LSM
> > infrastructure allows configuring all the LSMs, but enabling at build time
> > and
> > modifying at runtime a subset of
Hi Mimi,
> On Dec 23, 2024, at 5:09 AM, Mimi Zohar wrote:
>
> On Thu, 2024-10-17 at 09:55 -0600, Eric Snowberg wrote:
>> Motivation:
>>
>> Each end-user has their own security threat model. What is important to one
>> end-user may not be important to another. There is not a right or wrong
>> t
On Thu, 2024-10-17 at 09:55 -0600, Eric Snowberg wrote:
> Motivation:
>
> Each end-user has their own security threat model. What is important to one
> end-user may not be important to another. There is not a right or wrong threat
> model.
>
> A common request made when adding new kernel changes
Motivation:
Each end-user has their own security threat model. What is important to one
end-user may not be important to another. There is not a right or wrong threat
model.
A common request made when adding new kernel changes that could impact the
threat model around system kernel keys is to add
46 matches
Mail list logo
