On Mon, 2020-12-28 at 14:28 -0500, Ken Goldman wrote: > On 12/12/2020 9:22 PM, Mimi Zohar wrote: > > Ok. Going forward, it sounds like we need to define a new > > "boot_aggregate" record. One that contains a version number and PCR > > mask. > > Just BTW, there is a TCG standard for a TPM 2.0 PCR mask that works > well. Sounds good. > > There is also a standard for an event log version number. It is > the first event of a TPM 2.0 event log. It is strange. Ok > > One useful field, though, is a mapping between the algorithm ID (e.g., > sha256 is 0x000b) and the digest size (e.g., 32 bytes). This permits > a parser to parse a log even when it encounters an unknown digest > algorithm. The template data is prefixed with the template data length. The problem is verifying the boot_aggregate, not parsing the log. thanks, Mimi
