From: Fabian Pflug <f.pflug@pengutronix.de>
To: Marco Felsch <m.felsch@pengutronix.de>
Cc: barebox@lists.infradead.org, uol@pengutronix.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH] i.MX: hab: write srk lock with hab command
Date: Fri, 06 Mar 2026 11:36:21 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <89985270f1e92a39d25ec096b9999b0a159ecdc5.camel@pengutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ulfwp773ltirh4dbvcllje5sy7cxd2lolao6m4muqmn7lldcsq@zscclgrl3jso>
Hello Marco,
the C APi already does it, if you give it this flag.
It is device dependen on which fuse to burn, so have a look at:
static int imx6_hab_write_srk_hash_ocotp(const u8 *newsrk, unsigned flags)
{
int ret;
ret = imx_hab_write_srk_hash_ocotp(newsrk);
if (ret)
return ret;
if (flags & IMX_SRK_HASH_WRITE_LOCK) {
ret = imx_ocotp_write_field(OCOTP_SRK_LOCK, 1);
if (ret < 0)
return ret;
}
return 0;
}
static int imx8m_hab_write_srk_hash_ocotp(const u8 *newsrk, unsigned flags)
{
int ret;
ret = imx_hab_write_srk_hash_ocotp(newsrk);
if (ret)
return ret;
if (flags & IMX_SRK_HASH_WRITE_LOCK) {
ret = imx_ocotp_write_field(MX8M_OCOTP_SRK_LOCK, 1);
if (ret < 0)
return ret;
}
return 0;
}
which get called by
int imx_hab_write_srk_hash(const void *buf, unsigned flags)
Which is the C API.
I don't believe it is good to always write the lock bit in the C API, as this could be used to write partial hashes.
Kind regards
Fabian
On Fri, 2026-03-06 at 11:26 +0100, Marco Felsch wrote:
> Hi Fabian,
>
> On 26-03-06, Fabian Pflug wrote:
> > The write_srk_hash functions already support the flag to write the SRK
> > lock, but it is never used in barebox. To prevent an attacker from
> > calculating an SRK hash that has the same bits set as the current SRK
> > hash, but with maybe more, we lock the SRK hash to prevent turning bits.
> >
> > Writing the lock twice will probably result in unusable garbage and the
> > hab command itself already is written in a way to write the complete
> > hash and not parts of it.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Fabian Pflug <f.pflug@pengutronix.de>
> > ---
> > commands/hab.c | 2 +-
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/commands/hab.c b/commands/hab.c
> > index 8ae943a4c8..b8ef770066 100644
> > --- a/commands/hab.c
> > +++ b/commands/hab.c
> > @@ -14,7 +14,7 @@ static int do_hab(int argc, char *argv[])
> > {
> > int opt, ret, i;
> > char *srkhashfile = NULL, *srkhash = NULL;
> > - unsigned flags = 0;
> > + unsigned flags = IMX_SRK_HASH_WRITE_LOCK;
>
> This would fix only the hab cmd, not the C-API. Instead we should fix
> the C-API to write the LOCK after the SRK was burned/fused.
>
> Regards,
> Marco
>
> > u8 srk[SRK_HASH_SIZE];
> > int lockdown = 0, info = 0;
> >
> > --
> > 2.47.3
> >
> >
> >
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-03-06 10:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-03-06 10:20 Fabian Pflug
2026-03-06 10:26 ` Marco Felsch
2026-03-06 10:36 ` Fabian Pflug [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=89985270f1e92a39d25ec096b9999b0a159ecdc5.camel@pengutronix.de \
--to=f.pflug@pengutronix.de \
--cc=barebox@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=m.felsch@pengutronix.de \
--cc=uol@pengutronix.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox