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=-2.2 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 AA166CA9EA0 for ; Fri, 25 Oct 2019 13:22:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7FDBA21D71 for ; Fri, 25 Oct 2019 13:22:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729127AbfJYNW2 (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 Oct 2019 09:22:28 -0400 Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.156.1]:19640 "EHLO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2394578AbfJYNW2 (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 Oct 2019 09:22:28 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098404.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id x9PDKYWi004196 for ; Fri, 25 Oct 2019 09:22:26 -0400 Received: from e06smtp01.uk.ibm.com (e06smtp01.uk.ibm.com [195.75.94.97]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2vv0aek7mw-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Fri, 25 Oct 2019 09:22:24 -0400 Received: from localhost by e06smtp01.uk.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Fri, 25 Oct 2019 14:22:22 +0100 Received: from b06cxnps4076.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (9.149.109.198) by e06smtp01.uk.ibm.com (192.168.101.131) with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted; (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256/256) Fri, 25 Oct 2019 14:22:18 +0100 Received: from d06av25.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06av25.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.105.61]) by b06cxnps4076.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id x9PDMHfP33226838 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 25 Oct 2019 13:22:17 GMT Received: from d06av25.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 66D4711C04C; Fri, 25 Oct 2019 13:22:17 +0000 (GMT) Received: from d06av25.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 244EA11C054; Fri, 25 Oct 2019 13:22:16 +0000 (GMT) Received: from localhost.localdomain (unknown [9.85.164.225]) by d06av25.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Fri, 25 Oct 2019 13:22:16 +0000 (GMT) Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH] ima: skip verifying TPM 2.0 PCR values From: Mimi Zohar To: "Serge E. Hallyn" , Petr Vorel Cc: Jerry Snitselaar , Jarkko Sakkinen , Nayna , linux-integrity , ltp@lists.linux.it, Piotr =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Kr=F3l?= , Peter Huewe , Jason Gunthorpe Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2019 09:22:15 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20191025125202.GA1966@mail.hallyn.com> References: <1558041162.3971.2.camel@linux.ibm.com> <20190517150456.GA11796@dell5510> <20191024121848.GA5908@dell5510> <20191024172023.GA7948@linux.intel.com> <20191024213842.c6cl4tlnsi56pgcy@cantor> <1571964420.5173.12.camel@linux.ibm.com> <20191025021159.dt7ifgnebnke6ca7@cantor> <20191025085617.GA13329@x230> <20191025125202.GA1966@mail.hallyn.com> 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: 19102513-4275-0000-0000-000003778B3E X-IBM-AV-DETECTION: SAVI=unused REMOTE=unused XFE=unused x-cbparentid: 19102513-4276-0000-0000-0000388AB934 Message-Id: <1572009735.4532.17.camel@linux.ibm.com> X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:,, definitions=2019-10-25_08:,, 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=975 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1908290000 definitions=main-1910250127 Sender: linux-integrity-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 2019-10-25 at 07:52 -0500, Serge E. Hallyn wrote: > On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 10:56:17AM +0200, Petr Vorel wrote: > > Hi, > > > > > /sys/kernel/security/tpmX/major_version (on fedora and rhel at > least, is it elsewhere on other distros?) This patch doesn't define a securityfs file.  It must be a soft link to the actual file. > > > versus > > > > > /sys/class/tpm/tpmX/major_version This is a softlink to the TPM device (eg. /sys/devices/xxxx/.../tpm/tpm0). > > > > Is it more HW related (/sys/class/tpm/tpmX) or LSM related > > (/sys/kernel/security/tpmX)? > > I guess /sys/kernel/security/tpmX might be better. > > This is purely about whether the phsyical TPM chip is 1.2 or 2., > right? /sys/class/tpm/tpmX is where I would expect to find that. > > > Thanks for implementing this, I'll try to test it soon. > > Yes, it's been a pain point, and someone (..., I) should have done this years > ago - thanks! +1