-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 191
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Trusted Boot #41
Comments
Do we need more than a good root of trust as to the state of the ROM bootblock and the payload that we're going to launch? The changes that I've made to coreboot (osresearch/coreboot@033623b and others) are fairly minimal and allow most of the policy to be set in the Linux payload instead. |
Normally yes. If you measure also blobs which are executed parts of the sb and cpu via intel txt then you get a better sealing for more hardware parts. So the attacker can't change for example cpu and sb. I want to make tpm spec for the measurements and do the integration into coreboot. TCPA ACPI log is also very useful if you want to pre-calculate changes after updates etc.. |
Timothy Pearson is also needing this for his TALOS workstation stuff. See https://www.crowdsupply.com/raptor-computing-systems/talos-secure-workstation |
@zaolin more criticisms around coreboot/coreboot@c79e96b ? |
Hey,
in order to get the maximum sealing against the platform it would be useful to have a well documented and feature complete trusted boot in coreboot. I started to refactor the tpm stack and implement the missing features. Take a look at https://review.coreboot.org/#/q/status:open+tpm
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: