From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3A22E3FF1; Fri, 23 Feb 2024 18:30:06 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1708713007; cv=none; b=Frx2sd9TrEhcZIL/fREyQR2cJiYvyi5fpMGJzqKXqpcBVRrMntQgB6tD7OCn3lLrRd53pHgk0F3T0sNhuYk0SyOYlmEOrwXNITGyaW6Cz7N2FPN7k2MKqH9+I6uj4yCQ/vE6SOpXMCh31qLcmfYv9qGALlapNdNVqGeToe3/93E= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1708713007; c=relaxed/simple; bh=h4pO3Tgr1PTkYatoEkKrET/MjLlwGSker91U7kqaO1o=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=QBFUyTsE2Yhkqv02timKASG0rTN14cU/pqC/LjDnoMRgzWmlcMG94jSztEIL1sQZzKXsLHc6JeotO5utv6OR0oo0JCR3lnZv26sh4T7AylOO9aq3an2phwa9Zm9dM5X7yuNHvHIwruSwVPMV9T46q4iOqZdjAMyJvSjLum1ATTU= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=nbO0L3o5; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="nbO0L3o5" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EBFCDC433F1; Fri, 23 Feb 2024 18:30:05 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1708713006; bh=h4pO3Tgr1PTkYatoEkKrET/MjLlwGSker91U7kqaO1o=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=nbO0L3o5nidphoFvFp61Tw3dg+tZlos4tvnVsxt3LBum2bv9S4cTfrRbYtCdgcpk8 2K3+Bqs4WAKaIaUXuBtYuzhcR3M9qhvTbIwBIFPCyZaItSaQjQrr8Jd56PmZEqrQZb acEwsL077wp13g1v9RpB2z0nSaHiOLwmaOr9HiFeBHfwJxnAsJU8yhUiKDdA+zvn9n RHBDNQixtUS8LsYmrCB85aI7TzZ//EdZ8jMmeSMNGs5bSkm8fzONPNSAGQWnNkLgVx h4oof10cHJMT7hRlxo70kTubFphVQMWuM+RE2weKDWruUnrzxYplMjxaZS63eqxuam ++gfEOXUOc9gQ== Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2024 10:30:04 -0800 From: Eric Biggers To: Andrew Cooper Cc: Ard Biesheuvel , Ross Philipson , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org, linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org, kexec@lists.infradead.org, linux-efi@vger.kernel.org, dpsmith@apertussolutions.com, tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@redhat.com, bp@alien8.de, hpa@zytor.com, dave.hansen@linux.intel.com, mjg59@srcf.ucam.org, James.Bottomley@hansenpartnership.com, peterhuewe@gmx.de, jarkko@kernel.org, jgg@ziepe.ca, luto@amacapital.net, nivedita@alum.mit.edu, herbert@gondor.apana.org.au, davem@davemloft.net, kanth.ghatraju@oracle.com, trenchboot-devel@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 06/15] x86: Add early SHA support for Secure Launch early measurements Message-ID: <20240223183004.GE1112@sol.localdomain> References: <20240214221847.2066632-1-ross.philipson@oracle.com> <20240214221847.2066632-7-ross.philipson@oracle.com> <98ad92bb-ef17-4c15-88ba-252db2a2e738@citrix.com> <1a8e69a7-89eb-4d36-94d6-0da662d8b72f@citrix.com> <431a0b3a-47e5-4e61-a7fc-31cdf56f4e4c@citrix.com> <20240223175449.GA1112@sol.localdomain> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-doc@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: On Fri, Feb 23, 2024 at 06:20:27PM +0000, Andrew Cooper wrote: > On 23/02/2024 5:54 pm, Eric Biggers wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 23, 2024 at 04:42:11PM +0000, Andrew Cooper wrote: > >> Yes, and I agree.  We're not looking to try and force this in with > >> underhand tactics. > >> > >> But a blind "nack to any SHA-1" is similarly damaging in the opposite > >> direction. > >> > > Well, reviewers have said they'd prefer that SHA-1 not be included and given > > some thoughtful reasons for that. But also they've given suggestions on how to > > make the SHA-1 support more palatable, such as splitting it into a separate > > patch and giving it a proper justification. > > > > All suggestions have been ignored. > > The public record demonstrates otherwise. > > But are you saying that you'd be happy if the commit message read > something more like: > > ---8<--- > For better or worse, Secure Launch needs SHA-1 and SHA-256. > > The choice of hashes used lie with the platform firmware, not with > software, and is often outside of the users control. > > Even if we'd prefer to use SHA-256-only, if firmware elected to start us > with the SHA-1 and SHA-256 backs active, we still need SHA-1 to parse > the TPM event log thus far, and deliberately cap the SHA-1 PCRs in order > to safely use SHA-256 for everything else. > --- Please take some time to read through the comments that reviewers have left on previous versions of the patchset. - Eric