linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] tpm: Fix TPM 1.2 Shutdown sequence to prevent future TPM operations

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: <20190712033556.4pze65z7cxga5tdu@linux.intel.com>
Date:   Fri, 12 Jul 2019 06:35:56 +0300
From:   Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>
Cc:     Douglas Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>, stable@...r.kernel.org,
        groeck@...omium.org, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
        sukhomlinov@...gle.com, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Peter Huewe <peterhuewe@....de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tpm: Fix TPM 1.2 Shutdown sequence to prevent future TPM
 operations

On Fri, Jul 12, 2019 at 06:31:38AM +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 11, 2019 at 04:46:26PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 11, 2019 at 10:43:13PM +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jul 11, 2019 at 09:35:33PM +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> > > > > Careful with this, you can't backport this to any kernels that don't
> > > > > have the sysfs ops locking changes or they will crash in sysfs code.
> > > > 
> > > > Oops, I was way too fast! Thanks Jason.
> > > 
> > > Hmm... hold on a second.
> > > 
> > > How would the crash realize? I mean this is at the point when user space
> > > should not be active. 
> > 
> > Not strictly, AFAIK
> > 
> > > Secondly, why the crash would not realize with
> > > TPM2? The only thing the fix is doing is to do the same thing with TPM1
> > > essentially.
> > 
> > TPM2 doesn't use the unlocked sysfs path
> 
> Gah, sorry :-) I should have known that.
> 
> I can go through the patches needed when I come back from my leave after
> two weeks.

It might require a number of patches but maybe it makes also overally sense
to fix the racy sysfs code in stable kernels.

/Jarkko