On Sun, Sep 06, 2020 at 01:32:44PM -0700, James Bottomley wrote: > Cc to linux-api to get an opinion on two issues. First the background: > > We've had a fairly extensive discussion over on linux-integrity and > iterated to the conclusion that the kernel does need to export TPM 2.0 > PCR values for use by a variety of userspace integrity programmes > including early boot. The principle clinching argument seems to be > that these values are required by non-root systems, but in a default > Linux set up the packet marshalled communication device: /dev/tpmrm0, > is by default only usable by root. Historically, TPM 1.2 exported > these values via sysfs in a single file containing all 24 values: > > /sys/class/tpm/tpm0/pcrs > > with the format > > PCR-00: 7D 29 CB 08 0C 0F C4 16 7A 0E 9A F7 C6 D3 97 CD C1 21 A7 69 > PCR-01: 9C B6 79 4C E4 4B 62 97 4C AB 55 13 1A 2F 7E AE 09 B3 30 BE > ... Ick, that's not "one value per file" :( > TPM 2.0 adds more complexity: because of it's "agile" format, each TPM > 2.0 is required to support a set of hashes (of which at least sha1 and > sha256 are required but quite a few TPM 2.0s have at least two or > three more) and maintain 24 PCR registers for each supported hash. > The current patch exports each PCR bank under the directory > > /sys/class/tpm/tpm0/pcr-<hash>/<bank> > > So the sha256 bank value of PCR 7 can be obtained as > > cat /sys/class/tpm/tpm0/pcr-sha256/7 > 2ED93F199692DC6788EFA6A1FE74514AB9760B2A6CEEAEF6C808C13E4ABB0D42 > > And the output is a single non-space separated ascii hex value of the > hash. > > The issues we'd like input on are: > > 1. Should this be in sysfs or securityfs? > > 2. Should we export the values as one value per file (current patch) > or as a binary blob of all 24? Please just use a binary blob format. Binary sysfs files are exactly what this is for, you are just passing the data through the kernel from the hardware to userspace. You can have 24 binary files if that makes it easier, but the existing format really is an abuse of sysfs. Or use securityfs, that's fine too, but as you say, you have to write more code for that. thanks, greg k-h
