> But... that will mean that my ssh will need to be SGX-aware, and that > I will not be able to switch to AMD machine in future. ... or to other > Intel machine for that matter, right? I'm not privy to AMD's CPU design plans. However I think for the ssl/ssh case you'd use the same interfaces currently available for plugging in TPMs and dongles. It's a solved problem in the crypto libraries. > What new syscalls would be needed for ssh to get all this support? I don't see why you'd need new syscalls. > Ookay... I guess I can get a fake Replay Protected Memory block, which > will confirm that write happened and not do anything from China, but It's not quite that simple because there are keys and a counter involved but I am sure doable. > And, again, it means that quite complex new kernel-user interface will > be needed, right? Why ? For user space we have perfectly good existing system calls, for kernel space we have existing interfaces to the crypto and key layers for modules to use. Alan -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
