In many places we spelled out the phrase behind "initrd" in full, but this
isn't terribly useful. In fact, no "RAM disk" is used, so emphasizing this
is just confusing to the reader. Let's just say "initrd" everywhere, people
understand what this refers to, and that it's in fact an initramfs image.
Also, s/i.e./e.g./ where appropriate.
Also, don't say "in RAM", when in fact it's virtual memory, whose pages
may or may not be loaded in page frames in RAM, and we have no control over
this.
Also, add <filename></filename> and other minor cleanups.
Let's grab another so far unused PCR, and measure all sysext images into
it that we load from the ESP. Note that this is possibly partly redundant,
since sysext images should have dm-verity enabled, and that is hooked up
to IMA. However, measuring this explicitly has the benefit that we can
measure filenames too, easily, and that all without need for IMA or
anything like that.
This means: when booting a unified sd-stub kernel through sd-boot we'll
now have:
1. PCR 11: unified kernel image payload (i.e. kernel, initrd, boot
splash, dtb, osrelease)
2. PCR 12: kernel command line (i.e. the one embedded in the image, plus
optionally an overriden one) + any credential files picked up by
sd-stub
3. PCR 13: sysext images picked up by sd-stub
And each of these three PCRs should carry just the above, and start from
zero, thus be pre-calculatable.
Thus, all components and parameters of the OS boot process (i.e.
everything after the boot loader) is now nicely pre-calculable.
NOTE: this actually replaces previous measuring of the syext images into
PCR 4. I added this back in 845707aae2,
following the train of thought, that sysext images for the initrd should
be measured like the initrd itself they are for, and according to my
thinking that would be a unified kernel which is measured by firmware
into PCR 4 like any other UEFI executables.
However, I think we should depart from that idea. First and foremost
that makes it harder to pre-calculate PCR 4 (since we actually measured
quite incompatible records to the TPM event log), but also I think
there's great value in being able to write policies that bind to the
used sysexts independently of the earlier boot chain (i.e. shim, boot
loader, unified kernel), hence a separate PCR makes more sense.
Strictly speaking, this is a compatibility break, but I think one we can
get away with, simply because the initrd sysext images are currently not
picked up by systemd-sysext yet in the initrd, and because of that we
can be reasonably sure noone uses this yet, and hence relies on the PCR
register used. Hence, let's clean this up before people actually do
start relying on this.
Here we grab a new – on Linux so far unused (by my Googling skills, that
is) – and measure all static components of the PE kernel image into.
This is useful since for the first time we'll have a PCR that contains
only a PCR of the booted kernel, nothing else. That allows putting
together TPM policies that bind to a specific kernel (+ builtin initrd),
without having to have booted that kernel first. PCRs can be
pre-calculated. Yay!
You might wonder, why we measure just the discovered PE sections we are
about to use, instead of the whole PE image. That's because of the next
step I have in mind: PE images should also be able to carry an
additional section that contains a signature for its own expected,
pre-calculated PCR values. This signature data should then be passed
into the booted kernel and can be used there in TPM policies. Benefit:
TPM policies can now be bound to *signatures* of PCRs, instead of the
raw hash values themselves. This makes update management a *lot* easier,
as policies don't need to be updated whenever a kernel is updated, as
long as the signature is available. Now, if the PCR signature is
embedded in the kernel PE image it cannot be of a PCR hash of the kernel
PE image itself, because that would be a chicken-and-egg problem. Hence,
by only measuring the relavent payload sections (and that means
excluding the future section that will contain the PCR hash signature)
we avoid this problem, naturally.
Let's document this for now. We should be able to lift these limitations
sooner or later, at which point we can drop this documentation again.
These two limitations are a pitfall that people should be aware of,
before going FIDO2-only.
See: #20230#19208
This is an effort to compile a somewhat complete list how PCRs are
actually used on Linux systems these days. It contains data from: the
UEFI PC spec, the shim, the IMA, grub documentation.
I validated these PCRs to some level in the sources.
The grub specific stuff I only added in comments, since I was too lazy
too validate it (also, meh, grub).
It also gives people a hint on which PCR to bind to (and maybe kind of
an explanation of our default choice).
Previously, we supported only "," as separator. This adds support for
"+" and makes it the documented choice.
This is to make specifying PCRs in crypttab easier, since commas are
already used there for separating volume options, and needless escaping
sucks.
"," continues to be supported, but in order to keep things minimal not
documented.
Fixe: #19205
Some tokens support authorization via fingerprint or other biometric
ID. Add support for "user verification" to cryptenroll and cryptsetup.
Disable by default, as it is still quite uncommon.
In some cases user presence might not be required to get _a_
secret out of a FIDO2 device, but it might be required to
the get actual secret that was used to lock the volume.
Record whether we used it in the LUKS header JSON metadata.
Let the cryptenroll user ask for the feature, but bail out if it is
required by the token and the user disabled it.
Enabled by default.
Closes: https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/19246
Some FIDO2 devices allow the user to choose whether to use a PIN or not
and will HMAC with a different secret depending on the choice.
Some other devices (or some device-specific configuration) can instead
make it mandatory.
Allow the cryptenroll user to choose whether to use a PIN or not, but
fail immediately if it is a hard requirement.
Record the choice in the JSON-encoded LUKS header metadata so that the
right set of options can be used on unlock.
