From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752051AbdKUJ1e (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Nov 2017 04:27:34 -0500 Received: from mail-wm0-f66.google.com ([74.125.82.66]:43020 "EHLO mail-wm0-f66.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751497AbdKUJ1b (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Nov 2017 04:27:31 -0500 X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGs4zMaIFZlN+afcxPSsXhDmu2J906qYsIJjU4+GPPywWpGfPq0hIaTx7QfO7zoE/YrNOBXl3RY7wg== Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] tpm: don't return -EINVAL if TPM command validation fails From: Javier Martinez Canillas To: Jarkko Sakkinen Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Peter Huewe , Philip Tricca , Jason Gunthorpe , linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org, William Roberts References: <20171117100724.19257-1-javierm@redhat.com> <20171120231512.6wpqgcggfta3am7m@linux.intel.com> <7c148cf0-2403-55cf-1633-ff326d5c6f7b@redhat.com> Message-ID: <43dcb260-a85c-fd71-fcc0-5d2526d72520@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2017 10:27:28 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <7c148cf0-2403-55cf-1633-ff326d5c6f7b@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 11/21/2017 10:07 AM, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote: > On 11/21/2017 12:15 AM, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > >> matters less than breaking the sandbox. >> > > Yes, sorry for that. It wasn't clear to me that there was a sandbox and my > lack of familiarity with the code was the reason why I posted as a RFC in > the first place. > > Do you agree with Jason's suggestion to send a synthesized TPM command in > the that the command isn't supported? > Sorry, this should had been: send a synthesized TPM response in the case that the command isn't supported. Best regards, -- Javier Martinez Canillas Software Engineer - Desktop Hardware Enablement Red Hat