[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <2034693332.137003.1617219379831.JavaMail.zimbra@nod.at>
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2021 21:36:19 +0200 (CEST)
From: Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>
To: James Bottomley <jejb@...ux.ibm.com>
Cc: Ahmad Fatoum <a.fatoum@...gutronix.de>,
Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@...nel.org>,
horia geanta <horia.geanta@....com>,
Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.ibm.com>,
aymen sghaier <aymen.sghaier@....com>,
Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
davem <davem@...emloft.net>, kernel <kernel@...gutronix.de>,
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
"Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>,
Steffen Trumtrar <s.trumtrar@...gutronix.de>,
Udit Agarwal <udit.agarwal@....com>,
Jan Luebbe <j.luebbe@...gutronix.de>,
david <david@...ma-star.at>,
Franck Lenormand <franck.lenormand@....com>,
Sumit Garg <sumit.garg@...aro.org>,
linux-integrity <linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org>,
"open list, ASYMMETRIC KEYS" <keyrings@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Crypto Mailing List <linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
LSM <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 0/3] KEYS: trusted: Introduce support for NXP
CAAM-based trusted keys
James,
----- Ursprüngliche Mail -----
> Von: "James Bottomley" <jejb@...ux.ibm.com>
> Well, yes. For the TPM, there's a defined ASN.1 format for the keys:
>
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jejb/openssl_tpm2_engine.git/tree/tpm2-asn.h
>
> and part of the design of the file is that it's distinguishable either
> in DER or PEM (by the guards) format so any crypto application can know
> it's dealing with a TPM key simply by inspecting the file. I think you
> need the same thing for CAAM and any other format.
>
> We're encouraging new ASN.1 formats to be of the form
>
> SEQUENCE {
> type OBJECT IDENTIFIER
> ... key specific fields ...
> }
>
> Where you choose a defined OID to represent the key and that means
> every key even in DER form begins with a unique binary signature.
I like this idea.
Ahmad, what do you think?
That way we could also get rid off the kernel parameter and all the fall back logic,
given that we find a way to reliable detect TEE blobs too...
Thanks,
//richard
Powered by blists - more mailing lists