From: Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@pengutronix.de>
To: Ahmad Fatoum <a.fatoum@pengutronix.de>
Cc: Marco Felsch <m.felsch@pengutronix.de>,
BAREBOX <barebox@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] environment: add explicit option to allow searching for environment devices
Date: Mon, 4 May 2026 15:39:08 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <afihfJ4kqXP34y0i@pengutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <12eb5638-f580-4b3b-9099-9d72ddeb4f16@pengutronix.de>
On Mon, May 04, 2026 at 02:02:16PM +0200, Ahmad Fatoum wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On 5/4/26 1:35 PM, Marco Felsch wrote:
> > Hi Sascha,
> >
> > On 26-04-28, Sascha Hauer wrote:
> >> Add an explicit Kconfig option to allow searching the environment storage path
> >> based on the barebox environment partition GUID.
> >>
> >> So far this depended on CONFIG_INSECURE being set. First of all loading the
> >> barebox environment from storage is always insecure as the barebox environment
> >> doesn't have any security measures.
>
> It's possible to only allow environment loading after having verified
> that the system is in development mode for example.
>
> Autoloading the environment can't be secured as you note.
>
>
> >> The difference that comes with loading
> >> the environment from an explicitly specified storage device and autoprobing
> >> it from the available block devices is that with the former an attacker would
> >> need access to the internal storage whereas with the latter barebox could
> >> be tricked into loading an environment from an external SD card.
> >>
> >> Whether or not this is acceptable depends on the case, so ask the user for it.
> >>
> >> Real security can only be provided by not loading an environment from storage
> >> at all, but that can be controlled at compile time by disabling CONFIG_ENV_HANDLING
> >> or at runtime by security policies.
> >
> > TBH I actually don't see why this option can't follow the
> > CONFIG_INSECURE.
> >
> > Since ENV handling is enabled you do pull the HAS_INSECURE_DEFAULTS=y.
> > As you written above env handling is always insecure as of now.
> >
> > So it seems that you want to get rid of the CONFIG_INSECURE=y in your
> > setup. The only users of this CONFIG switch are global_env_autoprobe and
> > lib/random.c. Therefore my question, that I don't see why we can't stick
> > with the CONFIG_INSECURE switch.
>
> I also don't understand Sascha's motivation here.
>
> You can add global.env.autoprobe=1 to your environment to opt-in despite
> CONFIG_INSECURE being disabled. What's the new Kconfig option needed for?
Maybe I was confused by that because it's evaluated in the wrong order.
global.env.autoprobe is evaluated in default_environment_path_get() which
is executed before the default environment is loaded. We could fix that
with the cost of calling nvvar_load() twice, once with the default
environment loaded and once again with the persistent environment
loaded.
That said, I think whether or not we load the environment by part UUID
deserves its own decision, it shouldn't be hidden behind a generic
option. Also it's not consistent to claim that loading environment by
part UUID is insecure, but allowing it to be bypassed by setting
global.env.autoprobe=1, as if that would make it secure.
ENV_HANDLING_AUTOPROBE depends on ENV_HANDLING which itself selects
HAS_INSECURE_DEFAULTS which indicates that an option is selected that
has "potentially insecure defaults". Sounds consistent to me.
Sascha
--
Pengutronix e.K. | |
Steuerwalder Str. 21 | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 |
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-05-04 13:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-04-28 9:24 [PATCH 0/3] environment: Allow autoprobing env devices without CONFIG_INSECURE Sascha Hauer
2026-04-28 9:24 ` [PATCH 1/3] environment: Drop /dev/env0 default Sascha Hauer
2026-04-28 9:24 ` [PATCH 2/3] environment: add global.env.path Sascha Hauer
2026-04-28 9:24 ` [PATCH 3/3] environment: add explicit option to allow searching for environment devices Sascha Hauer
2026-05-04 11:35 ` Marco Felsch
2026-05-04 12:02 ` Ahmad Fatoum
2026-05-04 13:39 ` Sascha Hauer [this message]
2026-05-04 13:52 ` Ahmad Fatoum
2026-05-04 14:55 ` Sascha Hauer
2026-05-07 11:22 ` (subset) [PATCH 0/3] environment: Allow autoprobing env devices without CONFIG_INSECURE Sascha Hauer
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=afihfJ4kqXP34y0i@pengutronix.de \
--to=s.hauer@pengutronix.de \
--cc=a.fatoum@pengutronix.de \
--cc=barebox@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=m.felsch@pengutronix.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox