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=-5.2 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,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 AA016C433FE for ; Fri, 11 Dec 2020 11:03:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6FBA623A7C for ; Fri, 11 Dec 2020 11:03:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2393656AbgLKLC5 (ORCPT ); Fri, 11 Dec 2020 06:02:57 -0500 Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.156.1]:29542 "EHLO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2389198AbgLKLCz (ORCPT ); Fri, 11 Dec 2020 06:02:55 -0500 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098409.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 0BBB1uHl044220; Fri, 11 Dec 2020 06:02:12 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ibm.com; h=message-id : subject : from : to : cc : date : in-reply-to : references : content-type : mime-version : content-transfer-encoding; s=pp1; bh=2UWdtsIqmeTCpDTpXt5VueVpDBTzEi7aN1IYg6RDpdA=; b=ZOKHrGBDbNvIl0Sa1klVruC7a0MCf9kjMh++99ZBZ5L5XfT6V3K4F2QSU+nWWSMlDSr7 ZWIyZjtshjuWtdXdbU+j+nXCq03eGQyfA2y0Ur10nKSEiPduD4td3TP1peYZEUUT9CkX DCD9B41g4oOcUxO4gMj8HEM9HCZBZga0esQirtU6fswHlUpOfe999SQmQu+qxREC71mG GbUIs9KjI5pjCBWGT+2t93Vm+clsjvkOZyHz73TgaWASR378gdV6yonj6br6G7dWZs3l c8ys5y5sYEVhuL3sfOFxES0xQGCIi7qiRcONlCIki/iolfTSsk6TRZmvmd8Ucks/9ifH Lw== Received: from pps.reinject (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 35c6ka9mhx-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 11 Dec 2020 06:02:12 -0500 Received: from m0098409.ppops.net (m0098409.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by pps.reinject (8.16.0.36/8.16.0.36) with SMTP id 0BBB2ALL045416; Fri, 11 Dec 2020 06:02:10 -0500 Received: from ppma03ams.nl.ibm.com (62.31.33a9.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [169.51.49.98]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 35c6ka9mbx-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 11 Dec 2020 06:02:10 -0500 Received: from pps.filterd (ppma03ams.nl.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma03ams.nl.ibm.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 0BBAvTb2000783; Fri, 11 Dec 2020 11:01:59 GMT Received: from b06cxnps4076.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06relay13.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.109.198]) by ppma03ams.nl.ibm.com with ESMTP id 3581u86wx6-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 11 Dec 2020 11:01:59 +0000 Received: from b06wcsmtp001.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (b06wcsmtp001.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.105.160]) by b06cxnps4076.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 0BBB1vvD29950354 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 11 Dec 2020 11:01:57 GMT Received: from b06wcsmtp001.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id E07B4A4062; Fri, 11 Dec 2020 11:01:56 +0000 (GMT) Received: from b06wcsmtp001.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4EE6DA4054; Fri, 11 Dec 2020 11:01:55 +0000 (GMT) Received: from li-f45666cc-3089-11b2-a85c-c57d1a57929f.ibm.com (unknown [9.160.117.114]) by b06wcsmtp001.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Fri, 11 Dec 2020 11:01:55 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: <659c09673affe9637a5d1391c12af3aa710ba78a.camel@linux.ibm.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH AUTOSEL 5.7 03/30] ima: extend boot_aggregate with kernel measurements From: Mimi Zohar To: Tyler Hicks Cc: Sasha Levin , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org, Maurizio Drocco , Bruno Meneguele , linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org Date: Fri, 11 Dec 2020 06:01:54 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20201211031008.GN489768@sequoia> References: <20200708154116.3199728-1-sashal@kernel.org> <20200708154116.3199728-3-sashal@kernel.org> <1594224793.23056.251.camel@linux.ibm.com> <20200709012735.GX2722994@sasha-vm> <5b8dcdaf66fbe2a39631833b03772a11613fbbbf.camel@linux.ibm.com> <20201211031008.GN489768@sequoia> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-15" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.28.5 (3.28.5-12.el8) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.343,18.0.737 definitions=2020-12-11_01:2020-12-09,2020-12-11 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 clxscore=1031 impostorscore=0 bulkscore=0 priorityscore=1501 lowpriorityscore=0 spamscore=0 phishscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 mlxscore=0 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2009150000 definitions=main-2012110066 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 2020-12-10 at 21:10 -0600, Tyler Hicks wrote: > On 2020-11-29 08:17:38, Mimi Zohar wrote: > > Hi Sasha, > > > > On Wed, 2020-07-08 at 21:27 -0400, Sasha Levin wrote: > > > On Wed, Jul 08, 2020 at 12:13:13PM -0400, Mimi Zohar wrote: > > > >Hi Sasha, > > > > > > > >On Wed, 2020-07-08 at 11:40 -0400, Sasha Levin wrote: > > > >> From: Maurizio Drocco > > > >> > > > >> [ Upstream commit 20c59ce010f84300f6c655d32db2610d3433f85c ] > > > >> > > > >> Registers 8-9 are used to store measurements of the kernel and its > > > >> command line (e.g., grub2 bootloader with tpm module enabled). IMA > > > >> should include them in the boot aggregate. Registers 8-9 should be > > > >> only included in non-SHA1 digests to avoid ambiguity. > > > > > > > >Prior to Linux 5.8, the SHA1 template data hashes were padded before > > > >being extended into the TPM. Support for calculating and extending > > > >the per TPM bank template data digests is only being upstreamed in > > > >Linux 5.8. > > > > > > > >How will attestation servers know whether to include PCRs 8 & 9 in the > > > >the boot_aggregate calculation? Now, there is a direct relationship > > > >between the template data SHA1 padded digest not including PCRs 8 & 9, > > > >and the new per TPM bank template data digest including them. > > > > > > Got it, I'll drop it then, thank you! > > > > After re-thinking this over, I realized that the attestation server can > > verify the "boot_aggregate" based on the quoted PCRs without knowing > > whether padded SHA1 hashes or per TPM bank hash values were extended > > into the TPM[1], but non-SHA1 boot aggregate values [2] should always > > include PCRs 8 & 9. > > I'm still not clear on how an attestation server would know to include > PCRs 8 and 9 after this change came through a stable kernel update. It > doesn't seem like something appropriate for stable since it requires > code changes to attestation servers to handle the change. > > I know this has already been released in some stable releases, so I'm > too late, but perhaps I'm missing something. The point of adding PCRs 8 & 9 only to non-SHA1 boot_aggregate values was to avoid affecting existing attestation servers. The intention was when attestation servers added support for the non-sha1 boot_aggregate values, they'd also include PCRs 8 & 9. The existing SHA1 boot_aggregate value remains PCRs 0 - 7. To prevent this or something similar from happening again, what should have been the proper way of including PCRs 8 & 9? thanks, Mimi