[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CA+1=6yfmLXJbZu7Gd7cp_HOAbmHwx54aPgozWKBikWwZSYTOZw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2023 10:04:25 +0200
From: Thomas Fossati <thomas.fossati@...aro.org>
To: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
Cc: linux-coco@...ts.linux.dev,
Dionna Amalie Glaze <dionnaglaze@...gle.com>,
James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senpartnership.com>,
Peter Gonda <pgonda@...gle.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Samuel Ortiz <sameo@...osinc.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, peterz@...radead.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/6] configfs-tsm: Introduce a shared ABI for
attestation reports
Hi Dan,
> On 9/25/2023 9:17 PM, Dan Williams wrote:
> > +++ b/include/linux/tsm.h
> > @@ -0,0 +1,63 @@
> > +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */
> > +#ifndef __TSM_H
> > +#define __TSM_H
> > +
> > +#include <linux/sizes.h>
> > +#include <linux/types.h>
> > +#include <linux/device.h>
> > +
> > +#define TSM_INBLOB_MAX 64
I guess @inblob is supposed to (possibly) accommodate nonces from a
challenger, correct?
If so, 64 bytes may not be enough for attesters that produce
EAT-formatted reports -- see [1], and [2].
[1] https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-rats-eat-21.html#section-4.1-5
[2] https://github.com/ietf-rats-wg/eat/pull/421/files
cheers, thanks
Powered by blists - more mailing lists