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: <20090624205955.GA9632@srcf.ucam.org>
Date:	Wed, 24 Jun 2009 21:59:56 +0100
From:	Matthew Garrett <mjg@...hat.com>
To:	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:	Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>,
	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:
>> 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 ?

BIOSes can typically be replaced with trusted code. Is the source to the 
ACMs available? Is there any way for the owner of the machine to 
substitute their key for Intel's?

-- 
Matthew Garrett | mjg59@...f.ucam.org
--
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/