All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
diff for duplicates of <1592252491.11061.181.camel@linux.ibm.com>

diff --git a/a/1.txt b/N1/1.txt
index b17e87b..827455a 100644
--- a/a/1.txt
+++ b/N1/1.txt
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@ On Mon, 2020-06-15 at 16:41 -0300, Bruno Meneguele wrote:
 > On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 06:05:27PM +0200, Petr Vorel wrote:
 > > Hi Mimi,
 > > ...
-> > > > > With just this change, the ima_tpm.sh test is failing.  I assume it is
+> > > > > With just this change, the ima_tpm.sh test is failing. ?I assume it is
 > > > > > failing because it is reading the SHA1 TPM bank, not the SHA256 bank
 > > > > > to calculate the boot_aggregate hash.
 > > > > First question: is it correct to take sha256? Because on my test below it's
@@ -15,7 +15,7 @@ On Mon, 2020-06-15 at 16:41 -0300, Bruno Meneguele wrote:
 > > > > What is needed to get your setup?
 > > 
 > > > This isn't a configuration problem, but an issue of reading PCRs and
-> > > calculating the TPM bank appropriate boot_aggregate.  If you're
+> > > calculating the TPM bank appropriate boot_aggregate. ?If you're
 > > > calculating a sha256 boot_aggregate, then the test needs to read and
 > > > calculate the boot_aggregate by reading the SHA256 TPM bank.
 > > OK, I tested it on TPM 1.2 (no TPM 2.0 available atm).
@@ -40,7 +40,7 @@ On Mon, 2020-06-15 at 16:41 -0300, Bruno Meneguele wrote:
 
 As long as we're dealing with the "boot_aggregate", Maurizio just
 posted a kernel patch for including PCR 8 & 9 in the boot_aggregate.
- The existing IMA LTP "boot_aggregate" test is going to need to
+?The existing IMA LTP "boot_aggregate" test is going to need to
 support this change.
 
 I'd appreciate if someone could send me a TPM event log, the PCRs, and
@@ -57,8 +57,8 @@ system with a discrete TPM 2.0 with PCRs 8 & 9 events.
 > > > > IMA I incline to just require evmctl.
 > > 
 > > > Unlike TPM 1.2, the TPM 2.0 device driver doesn't export the TPM PCRs.
-> > >  Not only would you have a dependency on ima-evm-utils, but also on a
-> > > userspace application(s) for reading the TPM PCRs.  That dependency
+> > > ?Not only would you have a dependency on ima-evm-utils, but also on a
+> > > userspace application(s) for reading the TPM PCRs. ?That dependency
 > > > exists whether you're using evmctl to calculate the boot_aggregate or
 > > > doing it yourself.
 > > Hm, things get complicated.
@@ -76,13 +76,13 @@ system with a discrete TPM 2.0 with PCRs 8 & 9 events.
 > TCG spec version being implemented by the hw TPM, in a sysfs standard
 > output.
 
-That was only upstreamed in linux-v5.6.  Has it been backported?
+That was only upstreamed in linux-v5.6. ?Has it been backported?
 
 The PCRs are not exported for TPM 2.0, unfortunately, making
-regression tests dependent on a userspace app.  The existing LTP
+regression tests dependent on a userspace app. ?The existing LTP
 ima_tpm.sh test looks for the PCRs in either
 /sys/class/tpm/tpm0/device/pcrs or /sys/class/misc/tpm0/device/pcrs.
- Perhaps piggyback on the pseudo PCR file to test for TPM 1.2.
+?Perhaps piggyback on the pseudo PCR file to test for TPM 1.2.
 
 > 
 > > ...
@@ -110,13 +110,13 @@ ima_tpm.sh test looks for the PCRs in either
 > > > [Cc'ing Vitaly]
 > > 
 > > > The boot_aggregate.trs and boot_aggregate.log files are being created
-> > > in the tests/ directory.  Is that directory read-only?
+> > > in the tests/ directory. ?Is that directory read-only?
 > > Yes, drwxr-xr-x. Testing on fresh clone and issue persists.
 > > 
 > 
 > Yes, same thing here.. but didn't really check the reason for that. Will
 > take a time later to see what's happening.
 
-Thanks, much appreciated.  I'm not seeing that here.
+Thanks, much appreciated. ?I'm not seeing that here.
 
 Mimi
diff --git a/a/content_digest b/N1/content_digest
index cd6936c..430f45b 100644
--- a/a/content_digest
+++ b/N1/content_digest
@@ -5,24 +5,16 @@
  "ref\020200528160527.GA27243@dell5510\0"
  "ref\020200615194134.GF129694@glitch\0"
  "From\0Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com>\0"
- "Subject\0Re: [LTP v2 1/1] ima_tpm.sh: Fix for calculating boot aggregate\0"
+ "Subject\0[LTP] [LTP v2 1/1] ima_tpm.sh: Fix for calculating boot aggregate\0"
  "Date\0Mon, 15 Jun 2020 16:21:31 -0400\0"
- "To\0Bruno Meneguele <bmeneg@redhat.com>"
- " Petr Vorel <pvorel@suse.cz>\0"
- "Cc\0ltp@lists.linux.it"
-  Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
-  Petr Cervinka <pcervinka@suse.com>
-  Cyril Hrubis <chrubis@suse.cz>
-  linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org
-  Vitaly Chikunov <vt@altlinux.org>
- " Maurizio Drocco <maurizio.drocco@ibm.com>\0"
+ "To\0ltp@lists.linux.it\0"
  "\00:1\0"
  "b\0"
  "On Mon, 2020-06-15 at 16:41 -0300, Bruno Meneguele wrote:\n"
  "> On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 06:05:27PM +0200, Petr Vorel wrote:\n"
  "> > Hi Mimi,\n"
  "> > ...\n"
- "> > > > > With just this change, the ima_tpm.sh test is failing. \302\240I assume it is\n"
+ "> > > > > With just this change, the ima_tpm.sh test is failing. ?I assume it is\n"
  "> > > > > failing because it is reading the SHA1 TPM bank, not the SHA256 bank\n"
  "> > > > > to calculate the boot_aggregate hash.\n"
  "> > > > First question: is it correct to take sha256? Because on my test below it's\n"
@@ -35,7 +27,7 @@
  "> > > > What is needed to get your setup?\n"
  "> > \n"
  "> > > This isn't a configuration problem, but an issue of reading PCRs and\n"
- "> > > calculating the TPM bank appropriate boot_aggregate. \302\240If you're\n"
+ "> > > calculating the TPM bank appropriate boot_aggregate. ?If you're\n"
  "> > > calculating a sha256 boot_aggregate, then the test needs to read and\n"
  "> > > calculate the boot_aggregate by reading the SHA256 TPM bank.\n"
  "> > OK, I tested it on TPM 1.2 (no TPM 2.0 available atm).\n"
@@ -60,7 +52,7 @@
  "\n"
  "As long as we're dealing with the \"boot_aggregate\", Maurizio just\n"
  "posted a kernel patch for including PCR 8 & 9 in the boot_aggregate.\n"
- "\302\240The existing IMA LTP \"boot_aggregate\" test is going to need to\n"
+ "?The existing IMA LTP \"boot_aggregate\" test is going to need to\n"
  "support this change.\n"
  "\n"
  "I'd appreciate if someone could send me a TPM event log, the PCRs, and\n"
@@ -77,8 +69,8 @@
  "> > > > IMA I incline to just require evmctl.\n"
  "> > \n"
  "> > > Unlike TPM 1.2, the TPM 2.0 device driver doesn't export the TPM PCRs.\n"
- "> > > \302\240Not only would you have a dependency on ima-evm-utils, but also on a\n"
- "> > > userspace application(s) for reading the TPM PCRs. \302\240That dependency\n"
+ "> > > ?Not only would you have a dependency on ima-evm-utils, but also on a\n"
+ "> > > userspace application(s) for reading the TPM PCRs. ?That dependency\n"
  "> > > exists whether you're using evmctl to calculate the boot_aggregate or\n"
  "> > > doing it yourself.\n"
  "> > Hm, things get complicated.\n"
@@ -96,13 +88,13 @@
  "> TCG spec version being implemented by the hw TPM, in a sysfs standard\n"
  "> output.\n"
  "\n"
- "That was only upstreamed in linux-v5.6. \302\240Has it been backported?\n"
+ "That was only upstreamed in linux-v5.6. ?Has it been backported?\n"
  "\n"
  "The PCRs are not exported for TPM 2.0, unfortunately, making\n"
- "regression tests dependent on a userspace app. \302\240The existing LTP\n"
+ "regression tests dependent on a userspace app. ?The existing LTP\n"
  "ima_tpm.sh test looks for the PCRs in either\n"
  "/sys/class/tpm/tpm0/device/pcrs or /sys/class/misc/tpm0/device/pcrs.\n"
- "\302\240Perhaps piggyback on the pseudo PCR file to test for TPM 1.2.\n"
+ "?Perhaps piggyback on the pseudo PCR file to test for TPM 1.2.\n"
  "\n"
  "> \n"
  "> > ...\n"
@@ -130,15 +122,15 @@
  "> > > [Cc'ing Vitaly]\n"
  "> > \n"
  "> > > The boot_aggregate.trs and boot_aggregate.log files are being created\n"
- "> > > in the tests/ directory. \302\240Is that directory read-only?\n"
+ "> > > in the tests/ directory. ?Is that directory read-only?\n"
  "> > Yes, drwxr-xr-x. Testing on fresh clone and issue persists.\n"
  "> > \n"
  "> \n"
  "> Yes, same thing here.. but didn't really check the reason for that. Will\n"
  "> take a time later to see what's happening.\n"
  "\n"
- "Thanks, much appreciated. \302\240I'm not seeing that here.\n"
+ "Thanks, much appreciated. ?I'm not seeing that here.\n"
  "\n"
  Mimi
 
-5526320531f9a72057def36b02b58f88d4ddcdca008423eb335a31bab31783b2
+5607dba50acc07b99cf65ba3c983891d90db4a85751c2268d2045ebaa03d21bc

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.