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 Received: from phobos.denx.de (phobos.denx.de [85.214.62.61]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A4B7CC433F5 for ; Mon, 14 Feb 2022 06:36:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from h2850616.stratoserver.net (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by phobos.denx.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id B73E5837CE; Mon, 14 Feb 2022 07:36:15 +0100 (CET) Authentication-Results: phobos.denx.de; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linaro.org Authentication-Results: phobos.denx.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=u-boot-bounces@lists.denx.de Authentication-Results: phobos.denx.de; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=linaro.org header.i=@linaro.org header.b="ddyglYPF"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: by phobos.denx.de (Postfix, from userid 109) id DD6CB837F2; Mon, 14 Feb 2022 07:36:14 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail-pf1-x42d.google.com (mail-pf1-x42d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::42d]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by phobos.denx.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9A9F383025 for ; Mon, 14 Feb 2022 07:36:11 +0100 (CET) Authentication-Results: phobos.denx.de; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linaro.org Authentication-Results: phobos.denx.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=takahiro.akashi@linaro.org Received: by mail-pf1-x42d.google.com with SMTP id m22so8378646pfk.6 for ; Sun, 13 Feb 2022 22:36:11 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linaro.org; s=google; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:mail-followup-to:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=R42XMAb+H5+maX1HttlW9DHrSgtOS63UGwHaq74aCWI=; b=ddyglYPFNoGsnoKMxRwBWOLyxq4nhICPY9PEcuHb1VQ2JEdc7meXVacQ+u2Mhxc/Km +0s7huFLxOq+n0gcl54Hi+IxkREa0S6jq14v2aTemTITxCSisgGbZbqhGkv9GDrmL+IN 4vwIkQWyH/MEB/V4gZhjmcqtxWl9T4YFvyvUgpJIl2TMPK/DzfR0oO5AvhpMI0ewJwK6 zK0v5rxejwiqBlOUCPN+WliezqVwhOw3B5cC3Ogv+o+pbHXwNJPHANowFXTKmKgIVGxb jIq1CMWYdtIB9FnRILco3HVhqW3o4SNktOg3Tj3ZPtDc5lBFuDu1jbY1Qif7V+uo5Wgd zTsQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id :mail-followup-to:references:mime-version:content-disposition :in-reply-to; bh=R42XMAb+H5+maX1HttlW9DHrSgtOS63UGwHaq74aCWI=; b=yed1XySe7taeliXY6hXkRJZ0C1nfYDF8CIh5YWnanypP2NeIJ/ZJXav4qpjSlLvtZM TY41BOozYqbIQRuzi2KIM9dDPQ7g+eHSg50NfW0WpN0oTHG5CpA8i5zfcxOaRfWUMe72 pFsgUUskYXEwQ1mCTaMZksIOJC+ifJzHFnZZ4W3nVhYCiWPc+mSjTEyY87/obYpJEnx7 v4TeqmGUme4gxcLEPNuGPuJUI2VskGk96q0oTx1MYETuH976pWaSYLRx1/Hxn30uiT/5 ajLpPtsLYJ0h6DHOAdocAtuN3UYFMYL/mTy3GxZCyN/tiut8VFgB/0yingZkU8Lb3CgF VzAg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530HlJXySXPz33HMS4ri+6YF3verjQ4tVFGW3A+jMm5ekdvkd+/y +EgU8M/XeKDnuHSklRvZM6p2qQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwVS58kvLMn2/9FQ0S1c/v431hF5jSz/Y0LmUFb8u4KliTdk3KwlYPGjKMMUOZNzuW1676fIQ== X-Received: by 2002:a63:5d0c:: with SMTP id r12mr10699623pgb.183.1644820569857; Sun, 13 Feb 2022 22:36:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from laputa ([2400:4050:c3e1:100:c11:cd20:ca66:ba1d]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id u19sm24718438pfi.126.2022.02.13.22.36.08 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Sun, 13 Feb 2022 22:36:09 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2022 15:36:06 +0900 From: AKASHI Takahiro To: Ilias Apalodimas Cc: xypron.glpk@gmx.de, u-boot@lists.denx.de Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] test/py: efi_secboot: adjust secure boot tests to code changes Message-ID: <20220214063606.GH39639@laputa> Mail-Followup-To: AKASHI Takahiro , Ilias Apalodimas , xypron.glpk@gmx.de, u-boot@lists.denx.de References: <20220211073750.733348-1-ilias.apalodimas@linaro.org> <20220211073750.733348-2-ilias.apalodimas@linaro.org> <20220214015008.GD39639@laputa> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-BeenThere: u-boot@lists.denx.de X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39 Precedence: list List-Id: U-Boot discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: u-boot-bounces@lists.denx.de Sender: "U-Boot" X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.103.5 at phobos.denx.de X-Virus-Status: Clean On Mon, Feb 14, 2022 at 08:18:03AM +0200, Ilias Apalodimas wrote: > On Mon, Feb 14, 2022 at 10:50:08AM +0900, AKASHI Takahiro wrote: > > Ilias, > > > > On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 09:37:50AM +0200, Ilias Apalodimas wrote: > > > The previous patch is changing U-Boot's behavior wrt certificate based > > > binary authentication. Specifically an image who's digest of a > > > certificate is found in dbx is now rejected. Fix the test accordingly > > > and add another one testing signatures in reverse order > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Ilias Apalodimas > > > --- > > > changes since RFC: > > > - Added another test cases checking signature hashes in reverse order > > > test/py/tests/test_efi_secboot/test_signed.py | 30 +++++++++++++++++-- > > > 1 file changed, 28 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/test/py/tests/test_efi_secboot/test_signed.py b/test/py/tests/test_efi_secboot/test_signed.py > > > index 0aee34479f55..cc9396a11d48 100644 > > > --- a/test/py/tests/test_efi_secboot/test_signed.py > > > +++ b/test/py/tests/test_efi_secboot/test_signed.py > > > @@ -186,7 +186,7 @@ class TestEfiSignedImage(object): > > > assert 'Hello, world!' in ''.join(output) > > > > > > with u_boot_console.log.section('Test Case 5c'): > > > - # Test Case 5c, not rejected if one of signatures (digest of > > > + # Test Case 5c, rejected if one of signatures (digest of > > > # certificate) is revoked > > > output = u_boot_console.run_command_list([ > > > 'fatload host 0:1 4000000 dbx_hash.auth', > > > @@ -195,7 +195,8 @@ class TestEfiSignedImage(object): > > > output = u_boot_console.run_command_list([ > > > 'efidebug boot next 1', > > > 'efidebug test bootmgr']) > > > - assert 'Hello, world!' in ''.join(output) > > > + assert '\'HELLO\' failed' in ''.join(output) > > > + assert 'efi_start_image() returned: 26' in ''.join(output) > > > > > > with u_boot_console.log.section('Test Case 5d'): > > > # Test Case 5d, rejected if both of signatures are revoked > > > @@ -209,6 +210,31 @@ class TestEfiSignedImage(object): > > > assert '\'HELLO\' failed' in ''.join(output) > > > assert 'efi_start_image() returned: 26' in ''.join(output) > > > > > > + # Try rejection in reverse order. > > > > "Reverse order" of what? > > Of the test right above Please specify the signature database, I guess "dbx"? > > > > > + u_boot_console.restart_uboot() > > > > I don't think we need 'restart' here. > > I added it in each test function (not test case), IIRC, because we didn't > > have file-based non-volatile variables at that time. > > You do. dbx already holds dbx_hash.auth and dbx1_hash.auth (in that order) at > that point. The point is cleaning up dbx and testing against dbx1_hash. Why not simply overwrite "dbx" variable? Without "-a", "env set -e" does it if it is properly signed with KEK. > > > > > + with u_boot_console.log.section('Test Case 5e'): > > > + # Test Case 5e, authenticated even if only one of signatures > > > + # is verified. Same as before but reject dbx_hash1.auth only > > > > Please specify what test case "before" means. > > The test that run right before that Please add a particular test case number to avoid any ambiguity. I believe that a test case description should be easy enough to understand and convey no ambiguity especially if there is some subtle difference between cases. > > > > > + output = u_boot_console.run_command_list([ > > > + 'host bind 0 %s' % disk_img, > > > + 'fatload host 0:1 4000000 db.auth', > > > + 'setenv -e -nv -bs -rt -at -i 4000000:$filesize db', > > > + 'fatload host 0:1 4000000 KEK.auth', > > > + 'setenv -e -nv -bs -rt -at -i 4000000:$filesize KEK', > > > + 'fatload host 0:1 4000000 PK.auth', > > > + 'setenv -e -nv -bs -rt -at -i 4000000:$filesize PK', > > > + 'fatload host 0:1 4000000 db1.auth', > > > + 'setenv -e -nv -bs -rt -at -a -i 4000000:$filesize db', > > > + 'fatload host 0:1 4000000 dbx_hash1.auth', > > > + 'setenv -e -nv -bs -rt -at -i 4000000:$filesize dbx']) > > > > Now "db" has db.auth and db1.auth in this order and > > 'dbx" has dbx_hash1.auth. > > Is this what you intend to test? > > Yes. The patchset solved 2 bugs. One was not rejecting the image when a > single dbx entry was found. The second was that depending on the order the > image was signed and the keys inserted into dbx, the code could reject or > accept the image. Which part of "dbx" (or "db"?) is in a reverse order? -Takahiro Akashi > > > > -Takahiro Akashi > > > > > + assert 'Failed to set EFI variable' not in ''.join(output) > > > + output = u_boot_console.run_command_list([ > > > + 'efidebug boot add -b 1 HELLO host 0:1 /helloworld.efi.signed_2sigs -s ""', > > > + 'efidebug boot next 1', > > > + 'efidebug test bootmgr']) > > > + assert '\'HELLO\' failed' in ''.join(output) > > > + assert 'efi_start_image() returned: 26' in ''.join(output) > > > + > > > def test_efi_signed_image_auth6(self, u_boot_console, efi_boot_env): > > > """ > > > Test Case 6 - using digest of signed image in database > > > -- > > > 2.32.0 > > > > > Regards > /Ilias