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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB4B9C43381 for ; Wed, 27 Feb 2019 16:57:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BC8320823 for ; Wed, 27 Feb 2019 16:57:35 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=hansenpartnership.com header.i=@hansenpartnership.com header.b="oUwKV6Fi" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727400AbfB0Q5f (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 Feb 2019 11:57:35 -0500 Received: from bedivere.hansenpartnership.com ([66.63.167.143]:48162 "EHLO bedivere.hansenpartnership.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727240AbfB0Q5f (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 Feb 2019 11:57:35 -0500 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by bedivere.hansenpartnership.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8DA248EE47D; Wed, 27 Feb 2019 08:57:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from bedivere.hansenpartnership.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (bedivere.hansenpartnership.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NRXv54ZlDqe8; Wed, 27 Feb 2019 08:57:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from [153.66.254.194] (unknown [50.35.68.20]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by bedivere.hansenpartnership.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 34C6A8EE0EF; Wed, 27 Feb 2019 08:57:34 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=hansenpartnership.com; s=20151216; t=1551286654; bh=xThJvTBKzwJKy8EoviF8M9qZ3I10t60h22JhJ+5o/ug=; h=Subject:From:To:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=oUwKV6Fie791dANLI2xkkTES2TJqwvAmTJDLiR5n6FvYOr0adlS08iKhTrPIKiJ46 n0YVLGRyALr9Qf2wJ5Jf1JfIEsyTMS4PhYm7Ra0LdwzUNv1jdoOyjJn48+oDx87ubM OdKE4NImM10B7e/JtENa8XODmYvMb86j2S21airI= Message-ID: <1551286651.3105.11.camel@HansenPartnership.com> Subject: Re: About PureBoot and TPM based DRM's From: James Bottomley To: Jarkko Sakkinen , linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2019 08:57:31 -0800 In-Reply-To: <20190227155611.GA7434@linux.intel.com> References: <20190227155611.GA7434@linux.intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.26.6 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-integrity-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 2019-02-27 at 17:56 +0200, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > Just read this: > > https://puri.sm/posts/pureboot-the-high-security-boot-process/ > > Makes me ask: where are these TPM based DRM's? Never seen one but I > assume they exist. Anyway cool work otherwise. Actually, they don't, the article is just restating a common misconception that the TPM is used to enforce DRM and then saying they've found a non-evil use for it which, apparently, is using the TPM for standard key storage and measurement. Apparently this means we're also all working on non-evil uses ... James