[PATCH v6 06/14] x86: Add early SHA support for Secure Launch early measurements
Matthew Garrett
mjg59 at srcf.ucam.org
Fri May 12 09:13:18 PDT 2023
On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 03:24:04PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Fri, May 12 2023 at 12:28, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > Unless we assert that SHA-1 events are unsupported, it seems a bit odd
> > to force a policy on people who have both banks enabled. People with
> > mixed fleets are potentially going to be dealing with SHA-1 measurements
> > for a while yet, and while there's obviously a security benefit in using
> > SHA-2 instead it'd be irritating to have to maintain two attestation
> > policies.
>
> Why?
>
> If you have a mixed fleet then it's not too much asked to provide two
> data sets. On a TPM2 system you can enforce SHA-2 and only fallback to
> SHA-1 on TPM 1.2 hardware. No?
No, beause having TPM2 hardware doesn't guarantee that your firmware
enables SHA-2 (which also means this is something that could change with
firmware updates, which means that refusing to support SHA-1 if the
SHA-2 banks are enabled could result in an entirely different policy
being required (and plausibly one that isn't implemented in their
existing tooling)
More information about the kexec
mailing list