[edk2-devel] [PATCH] SecurityPkg/Tcg2PhysicalPresenceLib: Fix incorrect TCG VER comparision
Yao, Jiewen
jiewen.yao at intel.com
Fri Oct 16 02:30:57 UTC 2020
Thanks Terry.
I tend to give R-B. I read the code it seems no impact.
Would you please confirm you have tested both PP1.2 and PP1.3 configuration, with windows WHCK test pass?
Thank you
Yao Jiewen
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Lee, Terry <terry.lee at hpe.com>
> Sent: Friday, October 16, 2020 10:25 AM
> To: Yao, Jiewen <jiewen.yao at intel.com>; devel at edk2.groups.io;
> stefanb at linux.ibm.com; lersek at redhat.com; Gao, Zhichao
> <zhichao.gao at intel.com>
> Cc: Wang, Jian J <jian.j.wang at intel.com>; Zhang, Chao B
> <chao.b.zhang at intel.com>; Marc-André Lureau
> <marcandre.lureau at redhat.com>
> Subject: RE: [edk2-devel] [PATCH] SecurityPkg/Tcg2PhysicalPresenceLib: Fix
> incorrect TCG VER comparision
>
> Jiewen,
>
> I tested this patch on HPE Superdome Flex with both Linux and Windows.
>
> Terry
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Yao, Jiewen [mailto:jiewen.yao at intel.com]
> Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2020 6:09 PM
> To: Lee, Terry <terry.lee at hpe.com>; devel at edk2.groups.io;
> stefanb at linux.ibm.com; lersek at redhat.com; Gao, Zhichao
> <zhichao.gao at intel.com>
> Cc: Wang, Jian J <jian.j.wang at intel.com>; Zhang, Chao B
> <chao.b.zhang at intel.com>; Marc-André Lureau
> <marcandre.lureau at redhat.com>
> Subject: RE: [edk2-devel] [PATCH] SecurityPkg/Tcg2PhysicalPresenceLib: Fix
> incorrect TCG VER comparision
>
> Hello
> Is there any one can share the information on what test has been done for
> this ?
>
> Thank you
> Yao Jiewen
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Lee, Terry <terry.lee at hpe.com>
> > Sent: Friday, October 16, 2020 12:59 AM
> > To: devel at edk2.groups.io; stefanb at linux.ibm.com; lersek at redhat.com;
> > Gao, Zhichao <zhichao.gao at intel.com>
> > Cc: Yao, Jiewen <jiewen.yao at intel.com>; Wang, Jian J
> > <jian.j.wang at intel.com>; Zhang, Chao B <chao.b.zhang at intel.com>; Marc-
> > André Lureau <marcandre.lureau at redhat.com>
> > Subject: RE: [edk2-devel] [PATCH] SecurityPkg/Tcg2PhysicalPresenceLib:
> > Fix incorrect TCG VER comparision
> >
> > Could the package maintainer merge this patch? Thanks.
> >
> > Terry
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Stefan Berger [mailto:stefanb at linux.ibm.com]
> > Sent: Friday, July 10, 2020 7:27 AM
> > To: devel at edk2.groups.io; lersek at redhat.com; Gao, Zhichao
> > <zhichao.gao at intel.com>
> > Cc: Lee, Terry <terry.lee at hpe.com>; Yao, Jiewen
> > <jiewen.yao at intel.com>; Wang, Jian J <jian.j.wang at intel.com>; Zhang,
> > Chao B <chao.b.zhang at intel.com>; Marc-André Lureau
> > <marcandre.lureau at redhat.com>
> > Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [PATCH] SecurityPkg/Tcg2PhysicalPresenceLib:
> > Fix incorrect TCG VER comparision
> >
> > On 7/10/20 9:53 AM, Stefan Berger wrote:
> > > On 7/10/20 1:43 AM, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
> > >> (+Marc-André, Stefan)
> > >>
> > >> On 07/10/20 02:44, Gao, Zhichao wrote:
> > >>> This bug is not obeserved by me. But I view the code. The
> > >>> condition is incorrect and it would affect the TCG operation:
> > >>> if (!mIsTcg2PPVerLowerThan_1_3) {
> > >>> if (OperationRequest <
> > >>> TCG2_PHYSICAL_PRESENCE_VENDOR_SPECIFIC_OPERATION) {
> > >>> //
> > >>> // TCG2 PP1.3 spec defined operations that are reserved
> > >>> or un-implemented
> > >>> //
> > >>> return TCG_PP_GET_USER_CONFIRMATION_NOT_IMPLEMENTED;
> > >>> }
> > >>> } else {
> > >>> //
> > >>> // TCG PP lower than 1.3. (1.0, 1.1, 1.2)
> > >>> //
> > >>> if (OperationRequest <=
> > >>> TCG2_PHYSICAL_PRESENCE_NO_ACTION_MAX) {
> > >>> RequestConfirmed = TRUE;
> > >>> } else if (OperationRequest <
> > >>> TCG2_PHYSICAL_PRESENCE_VENDOR_SPECIFIC_OPERATION) {
> > >>> return TCG_PP_GET_USER_CONFIRMATION_NOT_IMPLEMENTED;
> > >>> }
> > >>> }
> > >>>
> > >> I've found that code myself, but I'm not familiar enough with TPM
> > >> PPI stuff to understand immediately the effects of this change. I
> > >> can see that where we used to return
> > >> TCG_PP_GET_USER_CONFIRMATION_NOT_IMPLEMENTED before, we
> > could now
> > >> assign "RequestConfirmed = TRUE", and vice versa, due to
> > >> "mIsTcg2PPVerLowerThan_1_3" being potentially inverted.
> > >>
> > >> But what does that *mean*? What is the behavioral change that human
> > >> end-users, or software components, will experience?
> > >
> > >
> > > The above code snipped is located in a default branch of a large
> > > switch statement that handles most of the common PPI operations
> > > independent of this change, so that at least is good.
> > >
> > > I would say that in the worst case some of the operations not
> > > otherwise handled may have mistakenly failed or could have been
> > > executed without user confirmation/interaction. On Linux at least
> > > PPI requests can only be sent by root.
> >
> >
> > I am running a somewhat dated version of edk2 (Fedora 31). The
> > operations advertised are: 0,5,14,21,22,23,24,33,96,97. All of these
> > are individually handled in the switch statement, so there should no
> > be any impact. I am currently not aware of whether this list can be
> > extended with some sort of module.
> >
> >
> > >
> > >
> > >>
> > >> Thanks
> > >> Laszlo
> > >>
> > >>> So I think it should be fixed.
> > >>>
> > >>> Thanks,
> > >>> Zhichao
> > >>>
> > >>>> -----Original Message-----
> > >>>> From: devel at edk2.groups.io <devel at edk2.groups.io> On Behalf Of
> > >>>> Laszlo Ersek
> > >>>> Sent: Thursday, July 9, 2020 6:02 PM
> > >>>> To: devel at edk2.groups.io; Gao, Zhichao <zhichao.gao at intel.com>
> > >>>> Cc: Terry Lee <terry.lee at hpe.com>; Yao, Jiewen
> > >>>> <jiewen.yao at intel.com>; Wang, Jian J <jian.j.wang at intel.com>;
> > >>>> Zhang, Chao B <chao.b.zhang at intel.com>
> > >>>> Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [PATCH]
> > >>>> SecurityPkg/Tcg2PhysicalPresenceLib: Fix incorrect TCG VER
> > >>>> comparision
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On 07/09/20 04:46, Gao, Zhichao wrote:
> > >>>>> From: Terry Lee <terry.lee at hpe.com>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> REF:
> > >>>>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__bugzilla.ti
> > >>>>> an
> > >>>>> ocore.org_show-5Fbug.cgi-3Fid-
> > 3D2697&d=DwIDaQ&c=C5b8zRQO1miGmBeVZ2
> > >>>>> LFWg&r=Jlc0Jxr620EZ-
> > CppyrjGotnxH9DrT0KvwcLjekZ9Dow&m=WPv3vn5VEelRC
> > >>>>> s-
> >
> W8pfNM00wMOfpKBesXnAhRfylF7g&s=iFUYthUCfHLeeQAvr_OhTPHTiA9hZvw
> > 48
> > >>>>> Bj8YhXhQAI&e=
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Tcg2PhysicalPresenceLibConstructor set the module variable
> > >>>>> mIsTcg2PPVerLowerThan_1_3 with incorrect TCG version
> comparision.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Cc: Jiewen Yao <jiewen.yao at intel.com>
> > >>>>> Cc: Jian J Wang <jian.j.wang at intel.com>
> > >>>>> Cc: Chao Zhang <chao.b.zhang at intel.com>
> > >>>>> Signed-off-by: Zhichao Gao <zhichao.gao at intel.com>
> > >>>>> ---
> > >>>>> .../SmmTcg2PhysicalPresenceLib/SmmTcg2PhysicalPresenceLib.c | 2
> +-
> > >>>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> diff --git
> > >>>>>
> > a/SecurityPkg/Library/SmmTcg2PhysicalPresenceLib/SmmTcg2PhysicalPr
> > >>>>> esen
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> ceLib.c
> > >>>>>
> > b/SecurityPkg/Library/SmmTcg2PhysicalPresenceLib/SmmTcg2PhysicalPr
> > >>>>> esen
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> ceLib.c
> > >>>>> index 1c46d5e69d..8afaa0a785 100644
> > >>>>> ---
> > >>>>>
> > a/SecurityPkg/Library/SmmTcg2PhysicalPresenceLib/SmmTcg2PhysicalPr
> > >>>>> esen
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> ceLib.c
> > >>>>> +++
> > >>>>>
> > b/SecurityPkg/Library/SmmTcg2PhysicalPresenceLib/SmmTcg2PhysicalPr
> > >>>>> +++ esenceLib.c
> > >>>>> @@ -387,7 +387,7 @@ Tcg2PhysicalPresenceLibConstructor ( {
> > >>>>> EFI_STATUS Status;
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> - if (AsciiStrnCmp(PP_INF_VERSION_1_2, (CHAR8
> > >>>>> *)PcdGetPtr(PcdTcgPhysicalPresenceInterfaceVer),
> > >>>>> sizeof(PP_INF_VERSION_1_2) - 1) <= 0) {
> > >>>>> + if (AsciiStrnCmp(PP_INF_VERSION_1_2, (CHAR8
> > >>>>> +*)PcdGetPtr(PcdTcgPhysicalPresenceInterfaceVer),
> > >>>>> + sizeof(PP_INF_VERSION_1_2) - 1) >= 0) {
> > >>>>> mIsTcg2PPVerLowerThan_1_3 = TRUE;
> > >>>>> }
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>> What is the practical impact of this bug / fix?
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Thanks
> > >>>> Laszlo
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#66307): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/66307
Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/75390754/1813853
Group Owner: devel+owner at edk2.groups.io
Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/unsub [edk2-devel-archive at redhat.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
More information about the edk2-devel-archive
mailing list