2021-04-29 01:55:12 +00:00
|
|
|
# What Attestation is
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A computer can use a TPM to demonstrate:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- possession of a valid TPM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- it being in a trusted state by dint of having executed (possibly
|
|
|
|
only) trusted code to get to that state
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- possession of objects such as asymmetric keypairs being resident on
|
|
|
|
the TPM (objects that might be used in the attestation protocol)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Possible results of succesful attestation:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- encrypted filesystems getting unlocked with the help of an
|
|
|
|
attestation server
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- issuance of X.509 certificate(s) for TPM-resident public keys
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- other secrets (e.g., credentials for various authentication systems)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# Attestation Protocols
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Attestation is done by a computer with a TPM interacting with an
|
|
|
|
attestation service over a network. This requires an attestation
|
|
|
|
protocol.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
## Notation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- `Encrypt_<name>` == encryption with the named private or secret key
|
|
|
|
(if symmetric, then this primitive is expected to provide
|
|
|
|
authenticated encryption).
|
|
|
|
- `Sign_<name>` == digital signature with the named private key.
|
|
|
|
- `MAC_<name>` == message authentication code keyed with the named
|
|
|
|
secret key.
|
|
|
|
- `CSn` == client-to-server message number `n`
|
|
|
|
- `SCn` == server-to-client message number `n`
|
|
|
|
- `{stuff, more_stuff}` == a sequence of data, a "struct"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
## Proof of Possession of TPM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proof of possession of a valid TPM is performed by the attestation
|
|
|
|
client sending its TPM's Endorsement Key (EK) certificate (if one is
|
|
|
|
available, else the attestation service must recognize the EK public
|
|
|
|
key) and then exchanging additional messages by which the client can
|
|
|
|
prove its possession of the EK.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proof of possession of an EK is complicated by the fact that EKs are
|
2021-04-29 20:40:06 +00:00
|
|
|
[generally decrypt-only](Decrypt-only-EK.md) (some TPMs also support
|
2021-04-29 01:55:12 +00:00
|
|
|
signing EKs, but the TCG specifications only require decrypt-only EKs).
|
|
|
|
The protocol has to have the attestation service send a challenge (or
|
|
|
|
key) encrypted to the EKpub and then the attestation client demonstrate
|
|
|
|
that it was able to decrypt that with the EK. However, this is not
|
|
|
|
_quite_ how attestation protocols work! Instead of plain asymmetric
|
|
|
|
encryption the server will use
|
|
|
|
[`TPM2_MakeCredential()`](TPM2_MakeCredential.md), while the attestation
|
|
|
|
client will use
|
|
|
|
[`TPM2_ActivateCredential()`](TPM2_ActivateCredential.md) instead of
|
|
|
|
plain asymmetric decryption.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
## Trusted State Attestation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trusted state is attested by sending a quote of Platform Configuration
|
|
|
|
Registers (PCRs) and the `eventlog` describing the evolution of the
|
|
|
|
system's state from power-up to the current state. The attestation
|
|
|
|
service vallidates the digests used to extend the various PCRs,
|
|
|
|
and perhaps the sequence in which they appear in the eventlog, typically
|
|
|
|
by checking a list of known-trusted digests (these are, for example,
|
|
|
|
checksums of firmware images).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Typically the attestation protocol will have the client generate a
|
|
|
|
signing-only asymmetric public key pair known as the attestation key
|
|
|
|
(AK) with which to sign the PCR quote and eventlog. Binding of the
|
|
|
|
EKpub and AKpub will happen via
|
|
|
|
[`TPM2_MakeCredential()`](TPM2_MakeCredential.md) /
|
|
|
|
[`TPM2_ActivateCredential()`](TPM2_ActivateCredential.md).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
## Binding of Other Keys to EKpub
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The semantics of [`TPM2_MakeCredential()`](TPM2_MakeCredential.md) /
|
|
|
|
[`TPM2_ActivateCredential()`](TPM2_ActivateCredential.md) make it
|
|
|
|
possible to bind a TPM-resident object to the TPM's EKpub.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
[`TPM2_MakeCredential()`](TPM2_MakeCredential.md) encrypts to the EKpub
|
|
|
|
a small secret datum and the name (digest of public part) of the
|
|
|
|
TPM-resident object being bound. The counter-part to this,
|
|
|
|
[`TPM2_ActivateCredential()`](TPM2_ActivateCredential.md), will decrypt
|
|
|
|
that and return the secret to the application IFF (if and only if) the
|
|
|
|
caller has access to the named object.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Typically attestation protocols have the client send its EKpub, EKcert
|
|
|
|
(if it has one), AKpub (the public key of an "attestation key"), and
|
|
|
|
other things (e.g., PCR quote and eventlog signed with the AK), and the
|
|
|
|
server will then send the output of `TPM2_MakeCredential()` that the
|
|
|
|
client can recover a secret from using `TPM2_ActivateCredential()`.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The implication is that if the client can extract the cleartext payload
|
|
|
|
of `TPM2_MakeCredential()`, then it must possess a) the EK private key
|
|
|
|
corresponding to the EKpub, b) the AK private key corresponding to the
|
|
|
|
object named by the server.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proof of possession can be completed immediately by demonstrating
|
|
|
|
knowledge of the secret sent by the server. Proof of possession can
|
|
|
|
also be delayed to an eventual use of that secret, allowing for single
|
|
|
|
round trip attestation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
## Attestation Protocol Patterns
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
### Single Round Trip Attestation Protocols
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
An attestation protocol need not complete proof-of-possession
|
|
|
|
immediately if the successful outcome of the protocol has the client
|
|
|
|
demonstrate possession to other services/peers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In the following example the client obtains a certificate (`AKcert`) for
|
|
|
|
its AK, filesystem decryption keys, and possibly other things, and
|
|
|
|
eventually it will use those items in ways that -by virtue of having
|
|
|
|
thus been used- demonstrate that it possesses the EK used in the
|
|
|
|
protocol:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
CS0: Signed_AK({timestamp, [ID], EKpub, [EKcert],
|
|
|
|
AKpub, PCR_quote, eventlog})
|
|
|
|
SC0: {TPM2_MakeCredential(EKpub, AKpub, session_key),
|
|
|
|
Encrypt_session_key({AKcert, filesystem_keys, etc.})}
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(`ID` might be, e.g., a hostname.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The server will validate that the `timestamp` is near the current time,
|
|
|
|
the EKcert (if provided, else the EKpub), the signature using the
|
|
|
|
asserted (but not yet bound to the EKpub) AKpub, then it will validate
|
|
|
|
the PCR quote and eventlog, and, if everything checks out, will issue a
|
|
|
|
certificate for the AKpub and return various secrets that the client may
|
|
|
|
need.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The client obtains those items IFF (if and only if) the AK is resident
|
|
|
|
in the same TPM as the EK, courtesy of `TPM2_ActivateCredential()`'s
|
|
|
|
semantics.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NOTE well that in this example it is *essential* that the AKcert not be
|
|
|
|
logged in any public place since otherwise an attacker can make and send
|
|
|
|
`CS0` using a non-TPM-resident AK and any TPM's EKpub/EKcert known to
|
|
|
|
the attacker, and then it may recover the AK certificate from the log in
|
|
|
|
spite of being unable to recover the AK certificate from `SC1`!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
### Two Round Trip Attestation Protocols
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We can add a round trip to the protocol in the previous section to make
|
|
|
|
the client prove possession of the EK and binding of the AK to the EK
|
|
|
|
before it can get the items it needs. This avoids the security
|
|
|
|
consideration of having to not log the AKcert.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Below is a sketch of a stateless, two round trip attestation protocol.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Actual protocols tend to use a secret challenge that the client echoes
|
|
|
|
back to the server rather than a secret key possesion of which is proven
|
|
|
|
with symmetriclly-keyed cryptographic algorithms.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
CS0: Signed_AK({timestamp, [ID], EKpub, [EKcert],
|
|
|
|
AKpub, PCR_quote, eventlog})
|
|
|
|
SC0: {TPM2_MakeCredential(EKpub, AKpub, session_key), ticket}
|
|
|
|
CS1: {ticket, MAC_session_key(CS0), CS0}
|
|
|
|
SC1: Encrypt_session_key({AKcert, filesystem_keys, etc.})
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
where `session_key` is an ephemeral secret symmetric authenticated
|
|
|
|
encryption key, and `ticket` is an authenticated encrypted state cookie:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
ticket = {vno, Encrypt_server_secret_key({session_key, timestamp, MAC_session_key(CS0)})}
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
where `server_secret_key` is a key known only to the attestation service
|
|
|
|
and `vno` identifies that key (in order to support key rotation without
|
|
|
|
having to try authenticated decryption twice near key rotation events).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The attestation server could validate that the `timestamp` is recent
|
|
|
|
upon receipt of `CS0`. But the attestation server can delay validation
|
|
|
|
of EKcert, signatures, and PCR quote and eventlog until receipt of
|
|
|
|
`CS1`. In order to produce `SC0` the server need only digest the AKpub
|
|
|
|
to produce the name input of `TPM2_MakeCredential()`. Upon receipt of
|
|
|
|
`CS1` (which repeats `CS0`), the server can decrypt the ticket, validate
|
|
|
|
the MAC of `CS0`, validate `CS0`, and produce `SC1` if everything checks
|
|
|
|
out.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In this protocol the client must successfully call
|
|
|
|
`TPM2_ActivateCredential()` to obtain the `session_key` that it then
|
|
|
|
proves possession of in `CS1`, and only then does the server send the
|
|
|
|
`AKcert` and/or various secret values to the client, this time saving
|
|
|
|
the cost of asymmetric encryption by using the `session_key` to key a
|
|
|
|
symmetric authenticated cipher.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
### Actual Protocols: ibmacs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(TBD)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
### Actual Protocols: safeboot.dev
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(TBD)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
### Actual Protocols: ...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(TBD)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# Long-Term State Kept by Attestation Services
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Attestation servers need to keep some long-term state:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- binding of `EKpub` and `ID`
|
|
|
|
- PCR validation profile for each identified client
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The PCR validation profile for a client consists of a set of required
|
|
|
|
and/or acceptable digests that must appear in each PCR's extension log.
|
|
|
|
These required and/or acceptable digests may be digests of firmware
|
|
|
|
images, boot loaders, boot loader configurations (e.g., `menu.lst`, for
|
|
|
|
Grub), operating system kernels, `initrd` images, filesystem root hashes
|
|
|
|
(think ZFS), etc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Some of these are obtained by administrators on a trust-on-first-use
|
|
|
|
(TOFU) basis.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
## Long-Term State Created by Attestation Services
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
An attestation service might support creation of host<->EKpub
|
|
|
|
bindings on a first-come-first-served basis.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
An attestation service might support deletion of host PCR validation
|
|
|
|
profiles that represent past states upon validation of PCR quotes using
|
|
|
|
newer profiles. This could be used to permit firmware and/or operating
|
|
|
|
system upgrades and then disallow downgrades after evidence of
|
|
|
|
successful upgrade.
|