[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <50b9d5059e8e2b86c25770d76432a555fbaf29c0.camel@linux.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2020 21:01:13 -0500
From: Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.ibm.com>
To: Ken Goldman <kgold@...ux.ibm.com>,
James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>,
Tyler Hicks <tyhicks@...ux.microsoft.com>
Cc: Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
stable@...r.kernel.org, Maurizio Drocco <maurizio.drocco@....com>,
Bruno Meneguele <bmeneg@...hat.com>,
linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org,
linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH AUTOSEL 5.7 03/30] ima: extend boot_aggregate with
kernel measurements
On Mon, 2020-12-28 at 14:28 -0500, Ken Goldman wrote:
> On 12/12/2020 9:22 PM, Mimi Zohar wrote:
> > Ok. Going forward, it sounds like we need to define a new
> > "boot_aggregate" record. One that contains a version number and PCR
> > mask.
>
> Just BTW, there is a TCG standard for a TPM 2.0 PCR mask that works
> well.
Sounds good.
>
> There is also a standard for an event log version number. It is
> the first event of a TPM 2.0 event log. It is strange.
Ok
>
> One useful field, though, is a mapping between the algorithm ID (e.g.,
> sha256 is 0x000b) and the digest size (e.g., 32 bytes). This permits
> a parser to parse a log even when it encounters an unknown digest
> algorithm.
The template data is prefixed with the template data length. The
problem is verifying the boot_aggregate, not parsing the log.
thanks,
Mimi
Powered by blists - more mailing lists