linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RESEND] docs: update trusted-encrypted.rst

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]

Date:   Mon, 17 Aug 2020 01:15:14 +0800
From:   Coly Li <colyli@...e.de>
To:     jejb@...ux.ibm.com
Cc:     Stefan Berger <stefanb@...ux.ibm.com>, keyrings@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
        Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com>,
        Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND] docs: update trusted-encrypted.rst

On 2020/8/17 01:12, James Bottomley wrote:
> On Mon, 2020-08-17 at 00:57 +0800, Coly Li wrote:
>> On 2020/8/17 00:36, James Bottomley wrote:
>>> On Sun, 2020-08-16 at 12:06 -0400, Stefan Berger wrote:
>>> [...]
>>>> A note in this file states this:
>>>>
>>>> Note: When using a TPM 2.0 with a persistent key with handle
>>>> 0x81000001, append 'keyhandle=0x81000001' to statements between
>>>> quotes, such as "new 32 keyhandle=0x81000001".
>>>>
>>>> Now if someone was (still) interested in TPM 1.2 
>>>> adapt the  note to state that these keyhandle=... should be
>>>> removed for the TPM 1.2 case.
>>>
>>> Actually, I also have a plan to match what userspace does and
>>> simply assume a keyhandle of 40000001 (generate an EC Storage
>>> Primary Key on the fly) if it's not specified, which will make the
>>> TPM1.2 and 2.0 versions of this the same.  Unfortunately the
>>> necessary precursor patches are taking an age to get upstream.
>>
>> Hi James,
>>
>> Do you have a plan to push such patches into upstream soon? If yes
>> than I may wait for your patch and withdraw this one.
> 
> Well, as I said above it depends on not yet upstream precursor patches.
>  They have been pending for about a year, so I've no real idea of the
> timeline.

I see. Then I will post a v2 patch only does the s/-o/-c fix, and leave
others untouched.

Thanks.

Coly Li