linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v9 06/19] x86: Add early SHA-1 support for Secure Launch early measurements

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]

Message-ID: <Zs/qJsKu3StL3Wzt@srcf.ucam.org>
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2024 04:25:26 +0100
From: Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	"Daniel P. Smith" <dpsmith@...rtussolutions.com>,
	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
	Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...nel.org>,
	Ross Philipson <ross.philipson@...cle.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
	linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org, kexec@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux-efi@...r.kernel.org, iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
	mingo@...hat.com, bp@...en8.de, hpa@...or.com,
	dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, ardb@...nel.org,
	James.Bottomley@...senpartnership.com, peterhuewe@....de,
	jarkko@...nel.org, jgg@...pe.ca, nivedita@...m.mit.edu,
	herbert@...dor.apana.org.au, davem@...emloft.net, corbet@....net,
	dwmw2@...radead.org, baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com,
	kanth.ghatraju@...cle.com, andrew.cooper3@...rix.com,
	trenchboot-devel@...glegroups.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 06/19] x86: Add early SHA-1 support for Secure Launch
 early measurements

On Wed, Aug 28, 2024 at 08:17:05PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:

> Ross et al, can you confirm that your code actually, at least by
> default and with a monstrous warning to anyone who tries to change the
> default, caps SHA1 PCRs if SHA256 is available?  And then can we maybe
> all stop hassling the people trying to develop this series about the
> fact that they're doing their best with the obnoxious system that the
> TPM designers gave them?

Presumably this would be dependent upon non-SHA1 banks being enabled?