From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [112.213.38.117]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 71CEBC433EF for ; Sat, 12 Feb 2022 22:56:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from boromir.ozlabs.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4Jx5SJ1WZdz3cBl for ; Sun, 13 Feb 2022 09:56:00 +1100 (AEDT) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; unprotected) header.d=linux.microsoft.com header.i=@linux.microsoft.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=default header.b=aWhMdABN; dkim-atps=neutral Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=linux.microsoft.com (client-ip=13.77.154.182; helo=linux.microsoft.com; envelope-from=dphadke@linux.microsoft.com; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; unprotected) header.d=linux.microsoft.com header.i=@linux.microsoft.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=default header.b=aWhMdABN; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from linux.microsoft.com (linux.microsoft.com [13.77.154.182]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4Jx5Rc2xHCz2yPq for ; Sun, 13 Feb 2022 09:55:23 +1100 (AEDT) Received: from [192.168.86.183] (unknown [50.47.106.53]) by linux.microsoft.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C869720B96C7 for ; Sat, 12 Feb 2022 14:54:51 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 linux.microsoft.com C869720B96C7 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.microsoft.com; s=default; t=1644706491; bh=Zd0DbVD37U3ccYckXtsCwTHSb+LesYRms+a4rlMBQaY=; h=Date:Subject:To:References:From:In-Reply-To:From; b=aWhMdABNaJ19v2ZlWAXS7cF/qh4vkMPurvKU41IGquT0sKNZUofHNH1pdAL83hbVe nNZ8CgQJ+gADIktTalqxqBNy3nVRjHZRTo1KSMFX76nyEeFOGDyy9X2Wj7KesuxVHo PA7m8gqQymH5znWHw1HbmRuG6E84QIgD9MA20i1Q= Message-ID: <016ae207-2ecb-1817-d10e-12819c8c40ef@linux.microsoft.com> Date: Sat, 12 Feb 2022 14:54:51 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.6.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH] image: Control FIT signature verification at runtime Content-Language: en-US To: openbmc@lists.ozlabs.org References: <20220131034147.106415-1-andrew@aj.id.au> <3c14e608-ca3d-4b79-9dfa-4f65ea1fc742@www.fastmail.com> From: Dhananjay Phadke In-Reply-To: <3c14e608-ca3d-4b79-9dfa-4f65ea1fc742@www.fastmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: openbmc@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Development list for OpenBMC List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: openbmc-bounces+openbmc=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "openbmc" On 2/8/2022 1:55 PM, Andrew Jeffery wrote: > Right, just as strap pin controlling the SB ROM in the 2600 allows bypass. > > It's just another one of these affecting a different boot stage. Why would someone leave such external exploit open in production? Fusing OTPCFG0[6]=1 would ignore external strap and OTPCFG0[1]=1 would enable secure boot with no way to bypass. Regards, Dhananjay