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=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED 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 9013CC43461 for ; Thu, 1 Apr 2021 18:17:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68C7160C3E for ; Thu, 1 Apr 2021 18:17:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S234791AbhDASRG convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Apr 2021 14:17:06 -0400 Received: from lithops.sigma-star.at ([195.201.40.130]:41070 "EHLO lithops.sigma-star.at" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S234273AbhDASGq (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Apr 2021 14:06:46 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lithops.sigma-star.at (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FD18606BA25; Thu, 1 Apr 2021 15:17:46 +0200 (CEST) Received: from lithops.sigma-star.at ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (lithops.sigma-star.at [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10032) with ESMTP id bJBE-i7eTNS0; Thu, 1 Apr 2021 15:17:45 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lithops.sigma-star.at (Postfix) with ESMTP id D512A606BA2C; Thu, 1 Apr 2021 15:17:45 +0200 (CEST) Received: from lithops.sigma-star.at ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (lithops.sigma-star.at [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id tRm9oOfPG5bU; Thu, 1 Apr 2021 15:17:45 +0200 (CEST) Received: from lithops.sigma-star.at (lithops.sigma-star.at [195.201.40.130]) by lithops.sigma-star.at (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99E80606BA25; Thu, 1 Apr 2021 15:17:45 +0200 (CEST) Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2021 15:17:45 +0200 (CEST) From: Richard Weinberger To: Sumit Garg Cc: Ahmad Fatoum , Jarkko Sakkinen , horia geanta , Mimi Zohar , aymen sghaier , Herbert Xu , davem , James Bottomley , kernel , David Howells , James Morris , "Serge E. Hallyn" , Steffen Trumtrar , Udit Agarwal , Jan Luebbe , david , Franck Lenormand , linux-integrity , "open list, ASYMMETRIC KEYS" , Linux Crypto Mailing List , linux-kernel , LSM Message-ID: <1666035815.140054.1617283065549.JavaMail.zimbra@nod.at> In-Reply-To: References: Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 0/3] KEYS: trusted: Introduce support for NXP CAAM-based trusted keys MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT X-Originating-IP: [195.201.40.130] X-Mailer: Zimbra 8.8.12_GA_3807 (ZimbraWebClient - FF78 (Linux)/8.8.12_GA_3809) Thread-Topic: KEYS: trusted: Introduce support for NXP CAAM-based trusted keys Thread-Index: b36oPlTcuCXRSzXZSqikRqY0W9mM2w== Precedence: bulk List-ID: Sumit, ----- Ursprüngliche Mail ----- > Von: "Sumit Garg" > IIUC, this would require support for multiple trusted keys backends at > runtime but currently the trusted keys subsystem only supports a > single backend which is selected via kernel module parameter during > boot. > > So the trusted keys framework needs to evolve to support multiple > trust sources at runtime but I would like to understand the use-cases > first. IMO, selecting the best trust source available on a platform > for trusted keys should be a one time operation, so why do we need to > have other backends available at runtime as well? I thought about devices with a TPM-Chip and CAAM. IMHO allowing only one backend at the same time is a little over simplified. Thanks, //richard