From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ken Goldman Subject: Re: RFC: "Hardened" trusted keys Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2016 09:31:29 -0400 Message-ID: References: <20160829190547.GA18827@intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20160829190547.GA18827-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: tpmdd-devel-bounces-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org To: tpmdd-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org List-Id: tpmdd-devel@lists.sourceforge.net On 8/29/2016 3:05 PM, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > After LSS2016 I got this idea of having hardened trusted keys for TPM2 > where the key material is never exposed to kernel. Child keys of a > hardened trusted key would be unsealed using TPM2_EncryptDecrypt > operation. Beware that the TPM2_EncryptDecrypt command is optional. I know of at least one TPM vendor that does not implement the command due to export restrictions. Why not seal to a parent symmetric key and use TPM2_Unseal? Unseal is just a restricted decryption operation. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------