From: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
To: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>
Cc: linux-efi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
dhowells@redhat.com, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org,
lukas@wunner.de, keyrings@vger.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/7] efi: Get the secure boot status [ver #3]
Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2016 09:30:20 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <15173.1480066220@warthog.procyon.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1480016487.2444.18.camel@HansenPartnership.com>
James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com> wrote:
> Since you seem to be using this to mean "is the platform locked down?",
> this looks to be no longer complete in the UEFI 2.6 world. If
> DeployedMode == 0, even if SecureBoot == 1 and SetupMode == 0, you can
> remove the platform key by writing 1 to AuditMode and gain control of
> the secure variables. The lock down state becomes DeployedMode == 1,
> SecureBoot == 1 and SetupMode == 0
>
> See the diagram on page 1817
>
> http://www.uefi.org/sites/default/files/resources/UEFI%20Spec%202_6.pdf
How many pages?!
Does the DeployedMode variable not exist in older versions of the UEFI spec?
David
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: dhowells@redhat.com (David Howells)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH 5/7] efi: Get the secure boot status [ver #3]
Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2016 09:30:20 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <15173.1480066220@warthog.procyon.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1480016487.2444.18.camel@HansenPartnership.com>
James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com> wrote:
> Since you seem to be using this to mean "is the platform locked down?",
> this looks to be no longer complete in the UEFI 2.6 world. If
> DeployedMode == 0, even if SecureBoot == 1 and SetupMode == 0, you can
> remove the platform key by writing 1 to AuditMode and gain control of
> the secure variables. The lock down state becomes DeployedMode == 1,
> SecureBoot == 1 and SetupMode == 0
>
> See the diagram on page 1817
>
> http://www.uefi.org/sites/default/files/resources/UEFI%20Spec%202_6.pdf
How many pages?!
Does the DeployedMode variable not exist in older versions of the UEFI spec?
David
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
To: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>
Cc: dhowells@redhat.com, lukas@wunner.de, linux-efi@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, keyrings@vger.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/7] efi: Get the secure boot status [ver #3]
Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2016 09:30:20 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <15173.1480066220@warthog.procyon.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1480016487.2444.18.camel@HansenPartnership.com>
James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com> wrote:
> Since you seem to be using this to mean "is the platform locked down?",
> this looks to be no longer complete in the UEFI 2.6 world. If
> DeployedMode == 0, even if SecureBoot == 1 and SetupMode == 0, you can
> remove the platform key by writing 1 to AuditMode and gain control of
> the secure variables. The lock down state becomes DeployedMode == 1,
> SecureBoot == 1 and SetupMode == 0
>
> See the diagram on page 1817
>
> http://www.uefi.org/sites/default/files/resources/UEFI%20Spec%202_6.pdf
How many pages?!
Does the DeployedMode variable not exist in older versions of the UEFI spec?
David
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-11-25 9:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 59+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-11-23 12:53 [PATCH 0/7] efi: Pass secure boot mode to kernel [ver #3] David Howells
2016-11-23 12:53 ` David Howells
2016-11-23 12:53 ` [PATCH 2/7] x86/efi: Allow invocation of arbitrary runtime services " David Howells
2016-11-23 12:53 ` David Howells
2016-11-23 12:53 ` [PATCH 3/7] arm/efi: " David Howells
2016-11-23 12:53 ` David Howells
[not found] ` <147990561294.7576.6464430479448167484.stgit-S6HVgzuS8uM4Awkfq6JHfwNdhmdF6hFW@public.gmane.org>
2016-11-23 12:53 ` [PATCH 1/7] efi: use typed function pointers for runtime services table " David Howells
2016-11-23 12:53 ` David Howells
2016-11-23 12:53 ` David Howells
2016-11-23 12:54 ` [PATCH 4/7] efi: Add SHIM and image security database GUID definitions " David Howells
2016-11-23 12:54 ` David Howells
2016-11-23 12:54 ` David Howells
2016-11-23 12:54 ` [PATCH 5/7] efi: Get the secure boot status " David Howells
2016-11-23 12:54 ` David Howells
[not found] ` <147990565051.7576.9673287945782426886.stgit-S6HVgzuS8uM4Awkfq6JHfwNdhmdF6hFW@public.gmane.org>
2016-11-24 19:41 ` James Bottomley
2016-11-24 19:41 ` James Bottomley
2016-11-24 19:41 ` James Bottomley
2016-11-25 9:30 ` David Howells [this message]
2016-11-25 9:30 ` David Howells
2016-11-25 9:30 ` David Howells
[not found] ` <15173.1480066220-S6HVgzuS8uM4Awkfq6JHfwNdhmdF6hFW@public.gmane.org>
2016-11-25 9:52 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2016-11-25 9:52 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2016-11-25 9:52 ` Ard Biesheuvel
[not found] ` <CAKv+Gu_JxNLDjaK5jGbX9ACzM0uHJYMOFx7XDo4t7DtBMtFRGA-JsoAwUIsXosN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>
2016-11-25 12:03 ` David Howells
2016-11-25 12:03 ` David Howells
2016-11-25 12:03 ` David Howells
[not found] ` <16661.1480075392-S6HVgzuS8uM4Awkfq6JHfwNdhmdF6hFW@public.gmane.org>
2016-11-25 12:24 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2016-11-25 12:24 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2016-11-25 12:24 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2016-11-25 12:35 ` David Howells
2016-11-25 12:35 ` David Howells
2016-11-25 12:35 ` David Howells
2016-11-25 12:43 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2016-11-25 12:43 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2016-11-25 12:51 ` David Howells
2016-11-25 12:51 ` David Howells
2016-11-25 12:51 ` David Howells
2016-11-25 12:52 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2016-11-25 12:52 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2016-11-25 12:52 ` Ard Biesheuvel
[not found] ` <CAKv+Gu9c-C2uXZ0fVatCM8ffXJZDgjBcDb_T0nsFecGqgrF11Q-JsoAwUIsXosN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>
2016-11-25 13:00 ` David Howells
2016-11-25 13:00 ` David Howells
2016-11-25 13:00 ` David Howells
[not found] ` <31374.1480078855-S6HVgzuS8uM4Awkfq6JHfwNdhmdF6hFW@public.gmane.org>
2016-11-25 13:50 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2016-11-25 13:50 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2016-11-25 13:50 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2016-11-25 15:59 ` David Howells
2016-11-25 15:59 ` David Howells
2016-11-25 16:50 ` David Howells
2016-11-25 16:50 ` David Howells
2016-11-25 16:50 ` David Howells
2016-11-25 16:51 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2016-11-25 16:51 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2016-11-25 16:57 ` David Howells
2016-11-25 16:57 ` David Howells
2016-11-23 12:54 ` [PATCH 6/7] efi: Disable secure boot if shim is in insecure mode " David Howells
2016-11-23 12:54 ` David Howells
2016-11-23 12:54 ` [PATCH 7/7] efi: Add EFI_SECURE_BOOT bit " David Howells
2016-11-23 12:54 ` David Howells
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=15173.1480066220@warthog.procyon.org.uk \
--to=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com \
--cc=keyrings@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-efi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lukas@wunner.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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.