linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/3] tpm: Disable TCG_TPM2

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Tue, 21 May 2024 16:11:05 +0300
From: "Jarkko Sakkinen" <jarkko@...nel.org>
To: "Jarkko Sakkinen" <jarkko@...nel.org>, "James Bottomley"
 <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>, "Vitor Soares" <ivitro@...il.com>,
 <linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org>
Cc: <keyrings@...r.kernel.org>, "Peter Huewe" <peterhuewe@....de>, "Jason
 Gunthorpe" <jgg@...pe.ca>, "Mimi Zohar" <zohar@...ux.ibm.com>, "David
 Howells" <dhowells@...hat.com>, "Paul Moore" <paul@...l-moore.com>, "James
 Morris" <jmorris@...ei.org>, "Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>,
 <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] tpm: Disable TCG_TPM2_HMAC by default

On Tue May 21, 2024 at 4:00 PM EEST, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> On Tue May 21, 2024 at 3:33 PM EEST, James Bottomley wrote:
> > On Tue, 2024-05-21 at 10:10 +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> > > This benchmark could be done in user space using /dev/tpm0.
> >
> > Let's actually try that.  If you have the ibmtss installed, the command
> > to time primary key generation from userspace on your tpm is
> >
> > time tsscreateprimary -hi n -ecc nistp256
> >
> >
> > And just for chuckles and grins, try it in the owner hierarchy as well
> > (sometimes slow TPMs cache this)
> >
> > time tsscreateprimary -hi o -ecc nistp256
> >
> > And if you have tpm2 tools, the above commands should be:
> >
> > time tpm2_createprimary -C n -G ecc256
> > time tpm2_createprimary -C o -G ecc256
>
> Thanks, I definitely want to try these in my NUC7. I can try both
> stacks and it is pretty good test machine because it is old'ish
> and slow ;-)
>
> I'm also thinking differently than when I put out this pull request.
> I honestly think that it must be weird use case to use TPM with
> a machine that dies with a HMAC pipe. It makes no sense to me and
> I think we should focus on common sense here.
>
> I could imagine one use case: pre-production hardware that is not
> yet in ASIC. But in that case you would probably build your kernel
> picking exactly the right options. I mean it is only a default
> after all.
>
> I think we could add this:
>
> 	default X86 || ARM64
>
> This pretty covers the spectrum where HMAC does make sense by
> default. We can always relax it but this does not really take
> away the legit user base from the feature.
>
> It would be a huge bottleneck to make HMAC also opt-in because
> the stuff it adds makes a lot of sense when build on top. E.g.
> the asymmetric key patch set that I sent within early week was
> made possible by all this great work that you've done.
>
> So yeah, I'd like to send the above Kconfig changes, but that
> is all I want to do this at this point.

Patch is out (lore link was not yet available):

https://lkml.org/lkml/2024/5/21/583

BR, Jarkko