From: Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com>
To: Petr Vorel <pvorel@suse.cz>
Cc: Bruno Meneguele <bmeneg@redhat.com>,
ltp@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>
Subject: Re: [LTP v2 1/1] ima_tpm.sh: Fix for calculating boot aggregate
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2020 09:01:51 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1592571711.17802.21.camel@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200619100737.GB18704@dell5510>
On Fri, 2020-06-19 at 12:07 +0200, Petr Vorel wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> > 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,
> ...
> > > > To sum that: my patch is required for any system without physical TPM with with
> > > > kernel with b59fda449cf0 + it also works for TPM 1.2 (regardless kernel
> > > > version), because TPM 1.2 supports sha1 only boot aggregate.
>
> > > > But testing on kernel with b59fda449cf0 with TPM 2.0 is not only broken with
> > > > this patch, but also on current version in master, right? As you have
> > > > sha256:3fd5dc717f886ff7182526efc5edc3abb179a5aac1ab589c8ec888398233ae5 anyway.
> > > > So this patch would help at least testing on VM without vTPM.
>
>
> > > If we consider to delay this change until we have the ima-evm-utils
> > > released with the ima_boot_aggregate + make this test dependent on
> > > both ima-evm-utils and tsspcrread, would it be worth to SKIP the test in
> > > case a TPM2.0 sha256 bank is detected instead of FAIL? Thus we could
> > > have the test fixed for TPM1.2 && no-TPM cases until we get the full
> > > support for multiple banks?
> +1
>
> > 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
> > support this change.
> I'm not sure if I did something wrong, but it looks to me that 'evmctl
> ima_boot_aggregate' does not provide backward compatibility with TPM 1.2.
> Or am I wrong?
Calculating the "boot_aggregate" - "evmctl ima_boot_aggregate" - for
TPM 1.2 should work. Reading the code, it looks like it assumes that
the crypto library supports SHA1 and SHA256. That assumption needs to
be addressed.
The tests/boot_aggregate.test logs are TPM 2.0. The test is failing
on systems with a TPM 1.2. I'm working on a fix for this.
Mimi
prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-06-19 13:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-05-27 7:14 [LTP v2 1/1] ima_tpm.sh: Fix for calculating boot aggregate Petr Vorel
2020-05-27 17:41 ` Mimi Zohar
2020-05-28 14:07 ` Petr Vorel
2020-05-28 15:19 ` Mimi Zohar
2020-05-28 16:05 ` Petr Vorel
2020-06-15 19:41 ` Bruno Meneguele
2020-06-15 20:01 ` Bruno Meneguele
2020-06-16 22:40 ` Mimi Zohar
2020-06-17 19:52 ` Bruno Meneguele
2020-06-19 7:46 ` Petr Vorel
2020-06-15 20:21 ` Mimi Zohar
2020-06-17 1:21 ` Jerry Snitselaar
2020-06-17 20:45 ` Bruno Meneguele
2020-06-17 22:19 ` Maurizio Drocco
2020-06-19 8:21 ` Petr Vorel
2020-06-19 12:43 ` Mimi Zohar
2020-06-19 13:01 ` Petr Vorel
2020-06-19 10:07 ` Petr Vorel
2020-06-19 13:01 ` Mimi Zohar [this message]
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=1592571711.17802.21.camel@linux.ibm.com \
--to=zohar@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=bmeneg@redhat.com \
--cc=chrubis@suse.cz \
--cc=linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ltp@lists.linux.it \
--cc=maurizio.drocco@ibm.com \
--cc=pcervinka@suse.com \
--cc=pvorel@suse.cz \
--cc=vt@altlinux.org \
--cc=zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).