[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <49e1738c55c73819ee0e2cac0be74d81@walle.cc>
Date: Fri, 06 May 2022 12:52:13 +0200
From: Michael Walle <michael@...le.cc>
To: Ahmad Fatoum <a.fatoum@...gutronix.de>
Cc: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@...nel.org>,
Horia Geantă <horia.geanta@....com>,
Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.ibm.com>,
Pankaj Gupta <pankaj.gupta@....com>,
Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
James Bottomley <jejb@...ux.ibm.com>, 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>,
Jan Luebbe <j.luebbe@...gutronix.de>,
David Gstir <david@...ma-star.at>,
Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...nel.org>,
Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>,
Franck LENORMAND <franck.lenormand@....com>,
Sumit Garg <sumit.garg@...aro.org>,
Andreas Rammhold <andreas@...mhold.de>,
Tim Harvey <tharvey@...eworks.com>,
Matthias Schiffer <matthias.schiffer@...tq-group.com>,
linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org, keyrings@...r.kernel.org,
linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 0/7] KEYS: trusted: Introduce support for NXP
CAAM-based trusted keys
Am 2022-05-06 08:25, schrieb Ahmad Fatoum:
> Series applies on top of v5.18-rc5. Would be great if this could make
> it
> into v5.19.
>
> v8 was here:
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-integrity/09e2552c-7392-e1da-926b-53c7db0b118d@pengutronix.de
>
> Changelog is beneath each individual patch. Compared to v8, only code
> change is checking whether CAAM can support blobbing at init-time as
> apparently some Layerscape SoCs are available in a non-E(ncryption)
> variant that doesn't do AES. Previously, adding trusted keys on such
> SoCs would return an error with a cryptic error message.
>
>
> The Cryptographic Acceleration and Assurance Module (CAAM) is an IP
> core
> built into many newer i.MX and QorIQ SoCs by NXP.
>
> Its blob mechanism can AES encrypt/decrypt user data using a unique
> never-disclosed device-specific key.
>
> There has been multiple discussions on how to represent this within the
> kernel:
>
> The Cryptographic Acceleration and Assurance Module (CAAM) is an IP
> core
> built into many newer i.MX and QorIQ SoCs by NXP.
>
> Its blob mechanism can AES encrypt/decrypt user data using a unique
> never-disclosed device-specific key. There has been multiple
> discussions on how to represent this within the kernel:
>
> - [RFC] crypto: caam - add red blobifier
> Steffen implemented[1] a PoC sysfs driver to start a discussion on
> how to
> best integrate the blob mechanism.
> Mimi suggested that it could be used to implement trusted keys.
> Trusted keys back then were a TPM-only feature.
>
> - security/keys/secure_key: Adds the secure key support based on CAAM.
> Udit Agarwal added[2] a new "secure" key type with the CAAM as
> backend.
> The key material stays within the kernel only.
> Mimi and James agreed that this needs a generic interface, not
> specific
> to CAAM. Mimi suggested trusted keys. Jan noted that this could
> serve as
> basis for TEE-backed keys.
>
> - [RFC] drivers: crypto: caam: key: Add caam_tk key type
> Franck added[3] a new "caam_tk" key type based on Udit's work. This
> time
> it uses CAAM "black blobs" instead of "red blobs", so key material
> stays
> within the CAAM and isn't exposed to kernel in plaintext.
> James voiced the opinion that there should be just one user-facing
> generic
> wrap/unwrap key type with multiple possible handlers.
> David suggested trusted keys.
>
> - Introduce TEE based Trusted Keys support
> Sumit reworked[4] trusted keys to support multiple possible backends
> with
> one chosen at boot time and added a new TEE backend along with TPM.
> This now sits in Jarkko's master branch to be sent out for v5.13
>
> This patch series builds on top of Sumit's rework to have the CAAM as
> yet another
> trusted key backend.
>
> The CAAM bits are based on Steffen's initial patch from 2015. His work
> had been
> used in the field for some years now, so I preferred not to deviate
> too much from it.
>
> This series has been tested with dmcrypt[5] on an i.MX6Q/DL and an
> i.MX8M[6].
>
> Looking forward to your feedback.
For the whole series:
Tested-by: Michael Walle <michael@...le.cc> # on ls1028a (non-E and E)
-michael
Powered by blists - more mailing lists