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=-5.9 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,MENTIONS_GIT_HOSTING, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=unavailable 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 BF11BC19759 for ; Thu, 1 Aug 2019 07:30:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 92E17206A2 for ; Thu, 1 Aug 2019 07:30:25 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="UzX7Ppc2" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728582AbfHAHaV (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Aug 2019 03:30:21 -0400 Received: from mail-lj1-f193.google.com ([209.85.208.193]:34679 "EHLO mail-lj1-f193.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725946AbfHAHaV (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Aug 2019 03:30:21 -0400 Received: by mail-lj1-f193.google.com with SMTP id p17so68339621ljg.1; Thu, 01 Aug 2019 00:30:18 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=rdlu4Ad817zx+iOTcsjqQM76adHXpOWbEydNxUMSAfU=; b=UzX7Ppc2TrBZ0COGTnbdhjA8/92a3SmUDMUBe7LHJnt7UzjMivXlt5ctFlFa8oCssU SYmn0SU0YmBzG+xH1D7Xm6LwZdeQI4DMIuCFZ2apRvrxooP1XuUSa4h0cqvLb+yZ84WV gzhVlRU7mA0IUpLblx7J9CW2e26MxMXKOvypsTKT7OA+spMddfGXtcyN9dJUUq1oZ3L2 WXvXffxmd9eeUSa0XCpuLJgrwP5q0Njaz9GFOXVxMiAPzbRBN62y8b/zTpo9Vvq+4wem H3/6ktlq9TuBKIZYLltyIKoSiqKgUj5S5PLdGFqXB4oRQrT7eg2cwmMCz/P449szEX0W H97A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=rdlu4Ad817zx+iOTcsjqQM76adHXpOWbEydNxUMSAfU=; b=hNkzAwrdbRsfJhStlM5KWPM6IHEqTqlT31w7Y2vQVHfkv5EOmYrKuNf0uv+9UnqLUP JDkfs5TfYgJHtCvgF7d7dGVaO9EkfU0FNZT92K0qEnqYZuyL+MTr+/Fvd1DNgCfWsOFY 9DW5DAh3ZIflDF5nCRzVH7DwDR4u5MSsT5bXuBJ4v/SjTQc+xw5X6mozi6zhxlfA1Pjl zH2esaCyhlp7FXXNrHby9YSW6RwqXtU5tM3nvg2Kg5Q2gMWjlzmjkDhrILJw5pDHngDD HHSIYKS8B1QYJRQY2+R2zCKIjGLTKfRPGjPFz2klAM2m4vb3yNpNiSGrUfns0KnTZkAE 4kXw== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAU/ZXp8pPwlYi6lk4+neztU55IIbSdYv/xBVNVCh92bF3gmGhqU /m0LDSjwG/TdnxAdGkMYQK6y33tzBuFIrvVeQXI= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzD4VpesQpUb8MYg+Q5e04vCOtwoAClw957rRW1FlaRZEsQmMx74W0N61umpEVSCQWDHKBhpRkvaPwaSWsWw1Q= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:1290:: with SMTP id 16mr64210069ljs.88.1564644618088; Thu, 01 Aug 2019 00:30:18 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1564489420-677-1-git-send-email-sumit.garg@linaro.org> <19d9be198619e951750dedeb4d0a7f372083b42c.camel@pengutronix.de> In-Reply-To: <19d9be198619e951750dedeb4d0a7f372083b42c.camel@pengutronix.de> From: Janne Karhunen Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2019 10:30:06 +0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [Tee-dev] [RFC v2 0/6] Introduce TEE based Trusted Keys support To: Rouven Czerwinski Cc: Sumit Garg , "tee-dev @ lists . linaro . org" , Daniel Thompson , Jonathan Corbet , jejb@linux.ibm.com, Ard Biesheuvel , Linux Doc Mailing List , Jarkko Sakkinen , Linux Kernel Mailing List , dhowells@redhat.com, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, keyrings@vger.kernel.org, Mimi Zohar , Casey Schaufler , linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel , "Serge E. Hallyn" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-integrity-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 9:50 AM Rouven Czerwinski wrote: > > I'm aware of it - I have implemented a large part of the GP TEE APIs > > earlier (primarily the crypto functions). Does the TEE you work with > > actually support GP properly? Can I take a look at the code? > > AFAIK Sumit is working with the OP-TEE implementation, which can be > found on github: https://github.com/op-tee/optee_os Thanks, I will take a look. The fundamental problem with these things is that there are infinite amount of ways how TEEs and ROTs can be done in terms of the hardware and software. I really doubt there are 2 implementations in existence that are even remotely compatible in real life. As such, all things TEE/ROT would logically really belong in the userland and thanks to the bpfilter folks now the umh logic really makes that possible ... I think. The key implementation I did was just an RFC on the concept, what if we start to move the stuff that really belongs in the userspace to this pseudo-userland. It's not kernel, but it's not commonly accessible userland either. The shared memory would also work without any modifications between the umh based TEE/ROT driver and the userland if needed. Anyway, just my .02c. I guess having any new support in the kernel for new trust sources is good and improvement from the current state. I can certainly make my stuff work with your setup as well, what ever people think is the best. -- Janne