Received: by 2002:ad5:474a:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id i10csp2920895imu; Sun, 9 Dec 2018 12:36:10 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AFSGD/Wj1IKgGzB5l5K9DFaiT20e8jPw2aL4c7vNOudesU7aOmlLftGLi4Y4P1o6IlNZ1bQTOsdV X-Received: by 2002:a63:604f:: with SMTP id u76mr8683601pgb.401.1544387769987; Sun, 09 Dec 2018 12:36:09 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1544387769; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=Eq99+Zu7crcYSK+LxHWej9fzZN96BYMQANL/ojsRKWu00gr1R//Vodry8XnUiM3OFQ 4Io8GgW/E8PkONv8cFs1G1mXszFks6+ocwgjDUf9Exs8MhhXEHsUM3yY77AHEbi9Vqj7 cT/W2sLB7gdx/VDOk4KDKYXXiQVTFGMJteEGJASL67EZPkY+GXALci8EndP1dW+xv4V3 lHM7wA469wI0Kj8k3iB3jam09DLKkrFKGdHESSBU6L9Ry3t1O9tAQHOVLdMbCwkuwgtd 7fTp0+NXGSH+zmVB23vjswqxwsFQOYN1wzPfzcy//F0nOyiUAdfnkuzu9t1LnDIagwET gl+w== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:message-id:content-transfer-encoding :mime-version:references:in-reply-to:date:cc:to:from:subject; bh=ohc0lY8ITuStOCPFLrbRKwFUNbdx8hA/C00CcTJe51Q=; b=jUTgnOektobCgZhEi2ncG8APTbLr/l3476c+XJBXCg59oVZkTScNWuGwFez04HWbSC hd1FG+NfCI+v/H73ErDzGyKycijH2vRxXwVbUpQKT+KNcKAJj+BikXJ88BpDg1+8IHwE bgu4+E3/7YhDYS0xoZ3yEQDRThSiETSBr6CyN4iA8koeo7smeezRwMMeEURnz/UUZmZ8 PmdS03RohVqUANl/d0t45FP2DSWJktd4xtZ3kLCcF1MXYrbxSMz6IyjWcw2NSnhX1jnz U9st1QgoYvcW/z1jvZX0QiEvM1KlotvjJQpdamekoD3kmgW+2VW10I9XzgBxt20iZ9W/ ODiQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=ibm.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id a11si8554482pln.78.2018.12.09.12.35.54; Sun, 09 Dec 2018 12:36:09 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=ibm.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726634AbeLIUdL (ORCPT + 99 others); Sun, 9 Dec 2018 15:33:11 -0500 Received: from mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.158.5]:42704 "EHLO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726246AbeLIUdK (ORCPT ); Sun, 9 Dec 2018 15:33:10 -0500 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098421.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.22/8.16.0.22) with SMTP id wB9KSqo1072666 for ; Sun, 9 Dec 2018 15:33:08 -0500 Received: from e06smtp03.uk.ibm.com (e06smtp03.uk.ibm.com [195.75.94.99]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2p98m5an2j-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Sun, 09 Dec 2018 15:33:08 -0500 Received: from localhost by e06smtp03.uk.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Sun, 9 Dec 2018 20:33:07 -0000 Received: from b06cxnps4076.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (9.149.109.198) by e06smtp03.uk.ibm.com (192.168.101.133) with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted; (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256/256) Sun, 9 Dec 2018 20:33:04 -0000 Received: from d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.105.58]) by b06cxnps4076.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id wB9KX38B58064988 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Sun, 9 Dec 2018 20:33:03 GMT Received: from d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 157A64C040; Sun, 9 Dec 2018 20:33:03 +0000 (GMT) Received: from d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E0C14C046; Sun, 9 Dec 2018 20:33:02 +0000 (GMT) Received: from localhost.localdomain (unknown [9.80.88.113]) by d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Sun, 9 Dec 2018 20:33:01 +0000 (GMT) Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 4/7] tpm: modify tpm_pcr_read() definition to pass a TPM hash algorithm From: Mimi Zohar To: Roberto Sassu , Jarkko Sakkinen Cc: david.safford@ge.com, monty.wiseman@ge.com, linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, silviu.vlasceanu@huawei.com Date: Sun, 09 Dec 2018 15:32:51 -0500 In-Reply-To: <2f6c0365-6c17-2da1-9f5b-3c8e5cc301b2@huawei.com> References: <20181204082138.24600-1-roberto.sassu@huawei.com> <20181204082138.24600-5-roberto.sassu@huawei.com> <20181204234024.GC1233@linux.intel.com> <1544041904.4017.8.camel@linux.ibm.com> <1544125756.4017.70.camel@linux.ibm.com> <2f6c0365-6c17-2da1-9f5b-3c8e5cc301b2@huawei.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.20.5 (3.20.5-1.fc24) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 x-cbid: 18120920-0012-0000-0000-000002D6BDB8 X-IBM-AV-DETECTION: SAVI=unused REMOTE=unused XFE=unused x-cbparentid: 18120920-0013-0000-0000-0000210C2DE6 Message-Id: <1544387571.3794.17.camel@linux.ibm.com> X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:,, definitions=2018-12-09_08:,, signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=857 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1810050000 definitions=main-1812090189 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 2018-12-07 at 15:51 +0100, Roberto Sassu wrote: > On 12/6/2018 8:49 PM, Mimi Zohar wrote: > > PCRs for sha1 and sha256 algorithms are being updated and the > > measurement list verifies against the SHA1 PCR-10. > > > > Roberto, have you added support in ima-evm-utils to validate the other > > banks? > > I modified IMA LTP. I'm not finding it.  Was the test for the current code, where the same value is being padded for different algorithms, or for walking the proposed hash agile format? Mimi