From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Delivery-date: Tue, 30 Jul 2024 12:38:43 +0200 Received: from metis.whiteo.stw.pengutronix.de ([2a0a:edc0:2:b01:1d::104]) by lore.white.stw.pengutronix.de with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from ) id 1sYkFf-004R1z-04 for lore@lore.pengutronix.de; Tue, 30 Jul 2024 12:38:43 +0200 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([2607:7c80:54:3::133]) by metis.whiteo.stw.pengutronix.de with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1sYkFe-0001z2-9i for lore@pengutronix.de; Tue, 30 Jul 2024 12:38:42 +0200 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender:Cc:List-Subscribe: List-Help:List-Post:List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To: Content-Type:MIME-Version:References:Message-ID:Subject:To:From:Date:Reply-To :Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=dZgWRMYpoznjt4J/+Tko2MI7D0Q95NNo2p98mL/p2CU=; b=16cMiwxZEPqvPRQzauQ4Mn73Gn Bjx2Gf1CJ+dhRQZYowPD6z63RE+LJg0Do4uPhDb1h6dSMML3JjLGiwQ/PXUPiflYXXUAG8RxyHoKK pSmefMd7L0/DkJDug4MBLnONyWusVm3A810ywDOYHDF/1BKoQ12xw1Q2zvVk+i84giO2JDTjJZXVx L/lYfxznLqYUueteaUCmQbUY490VuEDTHXMhfUwSqLy9ZqJpoTQkpKOz8h0o7rOMqF9qGV+YqKEat fXVuFHyRAmMeVd2lJs62A9kHz5wDI6WGLxPoZzuw8d1BUTvuX9IGaE0+RE9Y9hmAm3end+LPh85EN NDUfzGqQ==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.97.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1sYkF8-0000000El8U-0KHe; Tue, 30 Jul 2024 10:38:10 +0000 Received: from metis.whiteo.stw.pengutronix.de ([2a0a:edc0:2:b01:1d::104]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.97.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1sYkF5-0000000El6Z-1MTm for barebox@lists.infradead.org; Tue, 30 Jul 2024 10:38:08 +0000 Received: from drehscheibe.grey.stw.pengutronix.de ([2a0a:edc0:0:c01:1d::a2]) by metis.whiteo.stw.pengutronix.de with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1sYkF2-0001v2-2B; Tue, 30 Jul 2024 12:38:04 +0200 Received: from [2a0a:edc0:2:b01:1d::c5] (helo=pty.whiteo.stw.pengutronix.de) by drehscheibe.grey.stw.pengutronix.de with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1sYkF1-003GN8-Lj; Tue, 30 Jul 2024 12:38:03 +0200 Received: from mfe by pty.whiteo.stw.pengutronix.de with local (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from ) id 1sYkF1-0096yV-1r; Tue, 30 Jul 2024 12:38:03 +0200 Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2024 12:38:03 +0200 From: Marco Felsch To: Ahmad Fatoum Message-ID: <20240730103803.sgjcq5fudslpibhc@pengutronix.de> References: <20240703-v2024-05-0-topic-hab-v2-0-17419aa5d3a3@pengutronix.de> <20240703-v2024-05-0-topic-hab-v2-7-17419aa5d3a3@pengutronix.de> <38177bf4-4a0e-4765-881e-8404370bfdd5@pengutronix.de> <20240704081526.ksuml42balhx4jym@pengutronix.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20240730_033807_388433_06FA32C8 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 35.50 ) X-BeenThere: barebox@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: BAREBOX Sender: "barebox" X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 2607:7c80:54:3::133 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: barebox-bounces+lore=pengutronix.de@lists.infradead.org X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on metis.whiteo.stw.pengutronix.de X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.3 required=4.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 7/9] i.MX8M: HABv4: add an option to allow key revocation X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Wed, 08 May 2019 21:11:16 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on metis.whiteo.stw.pengutronix.de) On 24-07-30, Ahmad Fatoum wrote: > Hello Marco, > > On 7/4/24 10:15, Marco Felsch wrote: > > Hi Ahmad, > > > > On 24-07-03, Ahmad Fatoum wrote: > >> Hello Marco, > >> > >> On 03.07.24 19:20, Marco Felsch wrote: > >>> The HAB code needs an special [Unlock] instruction to keep the > >>> SRK_REVOKE fuse bank unlocked. This is required if a key needs to be > >>> revoked. > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Marco Felsch > >>> --- > >>> arch/arm/mach-imx/Kconfig | 8 ++++++++ > >>> include/mach/imx/habv4-imx8-gencsf.h | 6 ++++++ > >>> 2 files changed, 14 insertions(+) > >>> > >>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-imx/Kconfig b/arch/arm/mach-imx/Kconfig > >>> index 61258137736f..68f55971506b 100644 > >>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-imx/Kconfig > >>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-imx/Kconfig > >>> @@ -835,6 +835,14 @@ config HABV4_QSPI > >>> help > >>> Enable this option to build signed QSPI/FlexSPI images. > >>> > >>> +config HABV4_CSF_UNLOCK_SRK_REVOKE > >>> + depends on HABV4 > >>> + bool "Unlock SRK revocation" > >>> + help > >>> + Enable this option to instruct the HAB code to not lock > >>> + the SRK_REVOKE_LOCK sticky bit. This is required for key > >>> + revocation. Don't enable this if you are unsure. > >> > >> I think for added safety we should have an extra option that prompts > >> for the key to be revoked and an initcall that is activated depending > >> on it, e.g.: > >> > >> config HABV4_CSF_SRK_REVOKE_INDEX > >> int "SRK to revoke" > >> range 0 3 > >> default 0 > >> depends on HABV4_CSF_SRK_REVOKE_UNLOCK > >> help > >> Which of the first three SRKs to revoke. The SRK indices are > >> 1-based. Saying 0 here will just print the SRK Revocation > >> register without modification. SRK #4 is immutable. > >> > >> Proceed with caution, revoking a SRK is irreversible and > >> manual manipulation of this code can brick the board! > >> > >> if HABV4_CSF_SRK_REVOKE_INDEX = HABV4_SRK_INDEX > >> comment "Can't revoke same SRK used for signing" > >> comment "Attempts to build a signed barebox image will fail" > >> endif > >> > >> and then some code that checks the same above condition during final > >> assembly of the signed image. > >> > >> What do you think? > > > > That's an good idea to make it more user-friendly for most users :) > > Regarding this patchset I do see it more as an addition since for my > > project the revocation is checked on every startup and we do allow the > > revocation of multiple SRK slots at the same time. > > Ok. I just have a single nit then, can you rename > HABV4_CSF_UNLOCK_SRK_REVOKE to HABV4_CSF_SRK_REVOKE_UNLOCK, so we can > add HABV4_CSF_SRK_REVOKE_INDEX in future with the same prefix? Sure, I can do this. Regards, Marco > > Thanks, > Ahmad > > > > > Regards, > > Marco > > > >>> config HAB_CERTS_ENV > >>> depends on HAB > >>> bool "Specify certificates in environment" > >>> diff --git a/include/mach/imx/habv4-imx8-gencsf.h b/include/mach/imx/habv4-imx8-gencsf.h > >>> index 5f92ceceab00..56d9ef2de92f 100644 > >>> --- a/include/mach/imx/habv4-imx8-gencsf.h > >>> +++ b/include/mach/imx/habv4-imx8-gencsf.h > >>> @@ -36,6 +36,12 @@ hab [Unlock] > >>> hab Engine = CAAM > >>> hab Features = RNG, MID > >>> > >>> +#if defined(CONFIG_HABV4_CSF_UNLOCK_SRK_REVOKE) > >>> +hab [Unlock] > >>> +hab Engine = OCOTP > >>> +hab Features = SRK REVOKE > >>> +#endif > >>> + > >>> hab [Install Key] > >>> /* verification key index in key store (0, 2...4) */ > >>> hab Verification index = 0 > >>> > >> > >> -- > >> Pengutronix e.K. | | > >> Steuerwalder Str. 21 | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | > >> 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 | > >> Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 | > >> > >> > > >