Simo Sorce @ 2020-12-04 07:32 MST:
On Fri, 2020-12-04 at 14:08 +0000, Peter Robinson wrote:
On Fri, Dec 4, 2020 at 2:04 PM Simo Sorce simo@redhat.com wrote:
On Thu, 2020-12-03 at 21:25 +0000, Peter Robinson wrote:
We are looking to no longer support TPM1.2 in RHEL9. Than raised the question with regards to opencryptoki-tpmtok if it should be changed in Fedora as well, so I thought I'd see what everyone thinks about future TPM1.2 support in Fedora. I know at one point in the last year or so trousers almost dropped from Fedora due to being orphaned for quite a while. From what I could find the following packages have dependencies:
ecryptfs-utils - --disable-tspi openconnect - looks like it will only build support if trousers-devel is there, and makes use of tpm2-tss as well. strongswan - --enable-tss-tss2 instead of --enable-tss-trousers? tboot - the trousers dependency was just in a policy tool that has now been deprecated upstream. opencryptoki-tpmtok - --disable-tpmtok
tpm-quote-tools, tpm-tools, and trousers are all tpm1.2 specific packages.
Another thing is that in the kernel there currently is no way to build with just tpm1.2 or tpm2.0 support so the kernel support for tpm1.2 would still be there.
I don't think Fedora needs to drop the tpm1.2 support if people want to continue supporting it, but wanted to put the question out there and see how everyone felt.
I think it should be dropped, tpm2 has been shipped in hardware for 5+ years and tpm1 has security issues, so I think the time is now to drop it. Please do a Fedora Change proposal to ensure it's communicated properly.
Won't that hurt people that have keys trapped in a TPM 1.2 device ?
Won't it hurt RHEL users in similar ways?
It may, but that is RHEL, and this Fedora, no ?
What is the likelihood of those users actively upgrading anyway?
Upgrades in RHEL are a much bigger deal, and usually better researched (also rare, usually people reinstall there).
In Fedora distro-upgrading w/o looking too hard at release notes is common.
Of course the amount of people that uses TPM 1.2 in Fedora is probably very small, so this change may be ok, but I just wanted to raise the issue.
Is there a way, after update to still use TPM 1.2 at all (even if it requires installing copr/other repo packages)? Or will people need to roll back their system to access those secrets at all ?
Simo.
Yes, the kernel support in the driver would still be there. Currently the driver code can't be compiled for just tpm1.2 or tpm2.0. So it would be a matter of getting userspace tools to talk to it.