[RFC PATCH 0/1] Anti rollback protection for FIT Images

[Thirupathaiah Annapureddy]

On 9/7/2020 11:15 PM, Rasmus Villemoes wrote:
> On 02/09/2020 09.58, Rasmus Villemoes wrote:
>> On 01/09/2020 22.48, Thirupathaiah Annapureddy wrote:
>>> Anti rollback protection is required when there is a need to retire
>>> previous versions of FIT images due to security flaws in them.
>>> Currently U-Boot Verified boot does not have rollback protection to
>>> protect against known security flaws.
>>
>> This is definitely something we've had on our todo-list/wishlist. But we
>> haven't had the time to sit down and work out the semantics and
>> implementation, so thanks for doing this.
> 
> ...
> 
>> The board callbacks would simply be given a pointer to the data part of
>> that node; that would make the versioning scheme rather flexible instead
>> of being limited to a single monotonically increasing u32 (hence also
>> the comparison logic should be in the board callbacks, instead of a
>> "get/set" interface).
> 
> Oh, and another reason for having the board callbacks being responsible
> for the Yay/Nay verdict is that that makes it possible to hook up a gpio
> that can be used to say "ignore rollback version check" - immensely
> useful during development, and might also come in handy for the end
> products.
This is not a good idea from security point of view as that would lead
to physical present attacks.

> 
> Rasmus
>