linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net-next v4 2/5] eth: fbnic: Accept minimum anti-rollback version from firmware

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: <a406ecb3-a94d-47a7-bff8-becc6302a775@intel.com>
Date: Mon, 12 May 2025 11:47:19 -0700
From: Jacob Keller <jacob.e.keller@...el.com>
To: Lee Trager <lee@...ger.us>, Alexander Duyck <alexanderduyck@...com>,
	"Jakub Kicinski" <kuba@...nel.org>, <kernel-team@...a.com>, "David S. Miller"
	<davem@...emloft.net>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Paolo Abeni
	<pabeni@...hat.com>, Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>, Jonathan Corbet
	<corbet@....net>, Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@...n.ch>, Mohsin Bashir
	<mohsin.bashr@...il.com>, Sanman Pradhan <sanman.p211993@...il.com>, Su Hui
	<suhui@...china.com>, Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>, Michal Swiatkowski
	<michal.swiatkowski@...ux.intel.com>
CC: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	<linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v4 2/5] eth: fbnic: Accept minimum anti-rollback
 version from firmware

On 5/9/2025 5:21 PM, Lee Trager wrote:
> fbnic supports applying firmware which may not be rolled back. This is
> implemented in firmware however it is useful for the driver to know the
> minimum supported firmware version. This will enable the driver validate
> new firmware before it is sent to the NIC. If it is too old the driver can
> provide a clear message that the version is too old.
> 
This reminds me of the original efforts i had with minimum firmware
versions for the ice E810 hardware.

I guess for fbnic, you entirely handle this within firmware so there's
no reason to provide an interface to control this, and you have a lot
more control over verifying that the anti-rollback behavior is correct.

The definition for the minimum version is baked into the firmware image?
So once a version with this anti-rollback is applied it then prevents
you from rolling back to lower version, and can do a verification to
enforce this. Unlike the similar "opt-in" behavior in ice which requires
a user to first apply a firmware and then set the parameter, opening up
a bunch of attestation issues due to not being a single atomic operation.