Should we add new (optional) functionality that would facilitate NHC doing load-time checking of cryptographic signatures and/or checksums on script and/or config files? or is this a dumb idea?
I'm not sure if this one is worthwhile or makes sense (as the new "maybe?" label indicates), so your feedback is most welcome! And to be clear: I realize that using root-writable checksums to compare against root-writable script files is not a security feature! But if done properly, cryptographic signatures can be.
I would imagine this taking the form of either a file of filename:checksum pairs or a directory of files containing the normal output of the standard checksum commands (such as sha256sum); there are lots of ways to do it, so if you have a better idea, please let me know! 😁
So what do you think? Good idea, bad idea, or don't care either way?
Should we add new (optional) functionality that would facilitate NHC doing load-time checking of cryptographic signatures and/or checksums on script and/or config files? or is this a dumb idea?
I'm not sure if this one is worthwhile or makes sense (as the new "maybe?" label indicates), so your feedback is most welcome! And to be clear: I realize that using
root-writable checksums to compare againstroot-writable script files is not a security feature! But if done properly, cryptographic signatures can be.I would imagine this taking the form of either a file of
filename:checksumpairs or a directory of files containing the normal output of the standard checksum commands (such assha256sum); there are lots of ways to do it, so if you have a better idea, please let me know! 😁So what do you think? Good idea, bad idea, or don't care either way?