linux-kernel - Re: [RFC v5][PATCH 0b/4] intel_txt: Intel(R) Trusted Execution Technology support for Linux

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20090624205042.GA8664@redhat.com>
Date:	Wed, 24 Jun 2009 16:50:42 -0400
From:	Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>
To:	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:	Joseph Cihula <joseph.cihula@...el.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...e.hu, hpa@...or.com,
	andi@...stfloor.org, chrisw@...s-sol.org, jmorris@...ei.org,
	jbeulich@...ell.com, peterm@...hat.com, gang.wei@...el.com,
	shane.wang@...el.com
Subject: Re: [RFC v5][PATCH 0b/4] intel_txt: Intel(R) Trusted Execution
	Technology support for Linux - Details

On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 01:37:49PM -0700, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
 > Dave Jones wrote:
 > > On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 05:41:26PM -0700, Joseph Cihula wrote:
 > >  
 > >  > The Q35_SINIT_17.BIN file is what Intel TXT refers to as an
 > >  > Authenticated Code Module.  It is specific to the chipset in the system
 > >  > and can also be found on the Trusted Boot site.  It is a firmware module
 > >  > digitally signed by Intel that is used as part of the DRTM process to
 > >  > verify and configure the system.  
 > > 
 > > This seems a little disingenious.  Firmware isn't typically loaded by grub
 > > into main memory and executed by the host processor.
 > > 
 > > so, is this all worthless without the binary blob ?
 > > 
 > > "trust us, it's signed by intel" doesn't make me feel more secure.
 > 
 > how's that different from your normal bios ?

well..

AFAICS, this code exists solely to enable a binary blob. We don't do that
for the BIOS.  Even for blobs like ACPI, we at least have documentation on
the opcodes/data structures.

Also, if they're the same as you claim, why isn't the blob just included as
part of the BIOS ?

	Dave

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/