[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <7bb4ff7b-0778-ad70-1fe0-6e1db284d45a@intel.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 14:19:26 -0700
From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
To: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com>, x86@...nel.org,
linux-sgx@...r.kernel.org
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
Jethro Beekman <jethro@...tanix.com>,
Darren Kenny <darren.kenny@...cle.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com, asapek@...gle.com, bp@...en8.de,
cedric.xing@...el.com, chenalexchen@...gle.com,
conradparker@...gle.com, cyhanish@...gle.com,
haitao.huang@...el.com, kai.huang@...el.com, kai.svahn@...el.com,
kmoy@...gle.com, ludloff@...gle.com, nhorman@...hat.com,
npmccallum@...hat.com, puiterwijk@...hat.com, rientjes@...gle.com,
sean.j.christopherson@...el.com, tglx@...utronix.de,
yaozhangx@...gle.com, mikko.ylinen@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v39 15/24] x86/sgx: Add SGX_IOC_ENCLAVE_PROVISION
On 10/2/20 9:50 PM, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> + * Failure to explicitly request access to a restricted attribute will cause
> + * sgx_ioc_enclave_init() to fail. Currently, the only restricted attribute
> + * is access to the PROVISION_KEY.
Could we also justify why access is restricted, please? Maybe:
Access is restricted because PROVISION_KEY is burned uniquely
into each each processor, making it a perfect unique identifier
with privacy and fingerprinting implications.
Are there any other reasons for doing it this way?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists