On 9/14/22 03:51, Vitaly Zaitsev via devel wrote:
On 13/09/2022 23:50, Demi Marie Obenour wrote:
Another option is a TPM-based authenticator. Would this be acceptable?
No. TPM 2.0 chip is a *proprietary* black box. Some of them have known
critical security vulnerabilities[1].
OK, but so is every onther secure processor (yubikeys, finians, etc). At
least TPM2 is ubiquitous, and watched/tested widely, and being improved
as a result. The vulnerability you refer to was due to not encrypting
LPC traffic between the motherboard and the TPM chip, which was
apparently due to the implementation being lazy rather than a TPM
deficiency. Traffic encryption is a standard protocol feature, and is
increasingly being used.
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue