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=-2.3 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_2 autolearn=no 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 044F3C4332F for ; Sun, 8 Sep 2019 14:20:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D6A712082C for ; Sun, 8 Sep 2019 14:20:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727053AbfIHOUl (ORCPT ); Sun, 8 Sep 2019 10:20:41 -0400 Received: from mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.158.5]:26074 "EHLO mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727006AbfIHOUl (ORCPT ); Sun, 8 Sep 2019 10:20:41 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (m0127361.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id x88EHTZ6033275 for ; Sun, 8 Sep 2019 10:20:39 -0400 Received: from e06smtp04.uk.ibm.com (e06smtp04.uk.ibm.com [195.75.94.100]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2uv7c1u1b8-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Sun, 08 Sep 2019 10:20:39 -0400 Received: from localhost by e06smtp04.uk.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Sun, 8 Sep 2019 15:20:37 +0100 Received: from b06avi18878370.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (9.149.26.194) by e06smtp04.uk.ibm.com (192.168.101.134) with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted; (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256/256) Sun, 8 Sep 2019 15:20:34 +0100 Received: from b06wcsmtp001.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (b06wcsmtp001.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.105.160]) by b06avi18878370.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id x88EKX1h45941156 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Sun, 8 Sep 2019 14:20:33 GMT Received: from b06wcsmtp001.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E962A4064; Sun, 8 Sep 2019 14:20:33 +0000 (GMT) Received: from b06wcsmtp001.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 74C77A405F; Sun, 8 Sep 2019 14:20:32 +0000 (GMT) Received: from localhost.localdomain (unknown [9.85.159.93]) by b06wcsmtp001.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Sun, 8 Sep 2019 14:20:32 +0000 (GMT) Subject: Re: KEYS-TRUSTED git From: Mimi Zohar To: Jarkko Sakkinen , linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org Cc: jejb@linux.ibm.com, dhowells@redhat.com, sumit.garg@linaro.org Date: Sun, 08 Sep 2019 10:20:31 -0400 In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.20.5 (3.20.5-1.fc24) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 x-cbid: 19090814-0016-0000-0000-000002A85A3A X-IBM-AV-DETECTION: SAVI=unused REMOTE=unused XFE=unused x-cbparentid: 19090814-0017-0000-0000-00003308D848 Message-Id: <1567952431.4614.140.camel@linux.ibm.com> X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:,, definitions=2019-09-08_09:,, signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1906280000 definitions=main-1909080157 Sender: linux-integrity-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org On Sun, 2019-09-08 at 03:10 +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > It seems that at least vast majority of the trusted keys patches flow > through my tree to the mainline. Still, it is undocumented in the > MAINTAINERS file. > > So, should I just add my TPM tree as the upstream there? Or should I > just create a new GIT for trusted keys? My TPM PR goes to Linux ATM. > Should my trusted keys PR go to David instead? That would definitely > require own tree. > > With Sumit's recent work trusted keys is turning more than just being > TPM keys so now it is a good time to consider the flow... Sumit, I'm > sorry that I haven't added your first series yet. I need to first sync > up how we are going to move forward. Thanks, Jarkko.  Agreed, trusted keys is becoming more than just TPM based keys.  Now would be a good time to set up at least a separate branch or GIT repo. Are all "trust" methods equivalent?  As new "trust" methods are defined, there should be a document describing the trust method, with a comparison to the TPM. (It would be nice to have some kernel selftests to ensure existing methods don't break.) Mimi