linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/5] Extend TPM PPI interface to support revision 1.3

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: <20190208220025.GB13567@linux.intel.com>
Date:   Sat, 9 Feb 2019 00:00:25 +0200
From:   Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Stefan Berger <stefanb@...ux.ibm.com>
Cc:     "Safford, David (GE Global Research)" <david.safford@...com>,
        Stefan Berger <stefanb@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        "linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org" <linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org" 
        <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] Extend TPM PPI interface to support revision 1.3

On Fri, Feb 08, 2019 at 04:21:02PM -0500, Stefan Berger wrote:
> On 1/18/19 10:00 AM, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 08:28:00PM +0000, Safford, David (GE Global Research) wrote:
> > > You might mention that this is an important feature, as on at least some
> > > systems, ppi function 23 is the only way to enable/disable PCR banks.
> > > 
> > > I have tested this patch set on my HP Spectre laptop, and I am finally
> > > able to turn the sha-1 bank on and off. Much appreciated!
> > > 
> > > Tested-by: David Safford <david.safford@...com>
> > Great thanks David.
> 
> 
> While we are at it and for the grand finale of the day :-)
> 
> +All you people, keep yourself alive!
> +Keep yourself alive!
> +Keep yourself alive!
> +C'mon, give me your reviewed's
> +to keep me satisfied!
> +Give me your signed-off's                       (1)
> +to keep me satisfied!
> +Keep yourself alive!
> +A few test-by's will keep me satisfied!
> +Keep yourself alive!
> +Check-in!                                                (2)
> +
> +[In the style of Queen]
> 
> 
> Jarrko, do (1) and (2) to keep me satisfied :-)

I still think that in 5/5 branching could be better but is not a biggie
for me (does not make the implementation as whole any kind of mess) and
since it is now peer tested I rather would not modify it right now.

Applied to master and next!

/Jarkko