# 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 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 outputs of succesful attestation: - encrypted filesystems getting unlocked with the help of an attestation server - other secrets (e.g., credentials for various authentication systems) - issuance of X.509 certificate(s) for TPM-resident public keys For servers these certificates would have `dNSName` subject alternative names (SANs). For a user device such a certificate might have a subject name and/or SANs identifying the user. Possible outputs of unsuccessful attestation: - alerting - diagnostics (e.g., which PCR extensions in the PCR quote and eventlog are not recognized) # Attestation Protocols Attestation is done by a computer with a TPM interacting with an attestation service over a network. This requires a network protocol for attestation. ## Notation - `Encrypt_` == encryption with the named private or secret key (if symmetric, then this primitive is expected to provide authenticated encryption). - `Sign_` == digital signature with the named private key. - `MAC_` == 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" - `{"key":,...}` == JSON text - `TPM2_MakeCredential()` == outputs of calling `TPM2_MakeCredential()` with `args` arguments - `TPM2_Certify()` == outputs of calling `TPM2_Certify()` with `args` arguments ## 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 [generally decrypt-only](Decrypt-only-EK.md) (some TPMs also support 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 validates 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. ## Binding hosts to TPMs (TBD. Talk about IDevID or similar certificates binding hosts to their factory-installed TPMs, and how to obtain those from vendors.) ## Attestation Protocol Patterns and Actual Protocols (decrypt-only EKs) Note: all the protocols described below are based on decrypt-only TPM endorsement keys. Let's start with few observations and security considerations: - Clients need to know which PCRs to quote. E.g., the [Safe Boot](https://safeboot.dev/) project and the [IBM sample attestation client and server](https://sourceforge.net/projects/ibmtpm20acs/) have the client ask for a list of PCRs and then the client quotes just those. But clients could just quote all PCRs. It's more data to send, but probably not a big deal, and it saves a round trip if there's no need to ask what PCRs to send. - Some replay protection or freshness indication for client requests is needed. A stateful method of doing this is to use a server-generated nonce. A stateless method is to use a timestamp. - Replay protection of server to client responses is mostly either not needed or implicitly provided by [`TPM2_MakeCredential()`](TMP2_MakeCredential.md) because `TPM2_MakeCredential()` generates a secret seed that randomizes its outputs even when all the inputs are the same across multiple calls to it. - Ultimately the protocol *must* make use of [`TPM2_MakeCredential()`](TMP2_MakeCredential.md) and [`TPM2_ActivateCredential()`](TPM2_ActivateCredential.md) in order to authenticate a TPM-running host via its TPM's EKpub. - Privacy protection of client identifiers may be needed, in which case TLS may be desired. - Even if a single round trip attestation protocol is adequate, a return routability check may be needed to avoid denial of service attacks. I.e., do not run a single round trip attestation protocol over UDP without first requiring the client to echo a nonce/cookie. - Statelessness on the server side is highly desirable, as that should permit having multiple servers and each of a client's messages can go to different servers. Conversely, keeping state on the server across multiple round trips can cause resource exhaustion / denial of service attack considerations. - Statelessness maps well onto HTTP / REST. Indeed, attestation protocol messages could all be idempotent and therefore map well onto HTTP `GET` requests but for the fact that all the things that may be have to be sent may not fit on a URI local part or URI query parameters, therefore HTTP `POST` is the better option. ### Single Round Trip Attestation Protocol Patterns An attestation protocol need not complete proof-of-possession immediately if the successful outcome of the protocol has the client subsequently demonstrate possession to other services/peers. This is a matter of taste and policy. However, one may want to have cryptographically secure "client attested successfully" state on the server without delay, in which case two round trips are the minimum for an attestation protocol. In the following example the client obtains a certificate (`AKcert`) for its AKpub, 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`! Alternatively, a single round trip attestation protocol can be implemented as an optimization to a two round trip protocol when the AK is persisted both, in the client TPM and in the attestation service's database: ``` CS0: Signed_AK({timestamp, AKpub, PCR_quote, eventlog}) SC0: {TPM2_MakeCredential(EKpub, AKpub, session_key), Encrypt_session_key({AKcert, filesystem_keys, etc.})} ``` ### Two Round Trip Stateless Attestation Protocol Patterns 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). [Note: `ticket` here is not in the sense used by TPM specifications, but in the sense of "TLS session resumption ticket" or "Kerberos ticket", and, really, it's just an encrypted state cookie so that the server can be stateless.] 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. (The `server_secret_key`, `ticket`, `session_key`, and proof of possession used in `CS1` could even conform to Kerberos or encrypted JWT and be used for authentication, possibly with an off-the-shelf HTTP stack.) An HTTP API binding for this protocol could look like: ``` POST /get-attestation-ticket Body: CS0 Response: SC0 POST /attest Body: CS1 Response: SC1 ``` ### Actual Protocols: ibmacs The [`IBM TPM Attestation Client Server`](https://sourceforge.net/projects/ibmtpm20acs/) (`ibmacs`) open source project has sample code for a "TCG attestation application". It implements a stateful (state is kept in a database) attestation and enrollment protocol over TCP sockets that consists of JSON texts of the following form, sent prefixed with a 32-bit message length in host byte order: ``` CS0: {"command":"nonce","hostname":"somehostname", "userid":"someusername","boottime":"2021-04-29 16:37:06"} SC0: {"response":"nonce","nonce":"", "pcrselect":"", ...} CS1: {"command":"quote","hostname":"somehostname", "quoted":"","signature":"", "event1":"","imaevent0":""} SC1: {"response":"quote"} CS2: {"command":"enrollrequest","hostname":"somehost", "tpmvendor":"...","ekcert":"","akpub":""} SC2: {"response":"enrollrequest", "credentialblob":"", "secret":""} CS3: {"command":"enrollcert","hostname":"somecert","challenge":""} SC3: {"response":"enrollcert","akcert":""} ``` The server keeps state across round trips. Note that this protocol has *up to* four (4) round trips. Because the `ibmacs` server keeps state in a database, it should be possible to elide some of these round trips in attestations subsequent to enrollment. The messages of the second and third round trips could be combined since there should be no need to wait for PCR quote validation before sending the EKcert and AKpub. The messages of the first round trip too could be combined with the messages of the second and third round trip by using a timestamp as a nonce -- with those changes this protocol would get down to two round trips. ### Actual Protocols: safeboot.dev (TBD) ### Actual Protocols: ... (TBD) ## Attestation Protocol Patterns and Actual Protocols (signing-only EKs) Some TPMs come provisioned with signing-only endorsement keys in addition to decrypt-only EKs. For example, vTPMs in Google cloud provides both, decrypt-only and signing-only EKs. Signing-only EKs can be used for attestation as well. [Ideally signing-only EKs can be restricted to force the use of `TPM2_Certify()`? Restricted signing keys can only sign payloads that start with a magic value, whereas unrestricted signing keys can sign any payload.] Signing-only EKs make single round trip attestation protocols possible that also provide immediate attestation status because signing provides proof of possession non-interactively, whereas asymmetric encryption requires interaction to prove possession: ``` CS0: Signed_AK({timestamp, [ID], EKpub, [EKcert], AKpub, TPM2_Certify(EKpub, AKpub), PCR_quote, eventlog}) SC0: AKcert ``` If secrets need to be sent back, then a decrypt-only EK also neds to be used: ``` CS0: Signed_AK({timestamp, [ID], EKpub_signing, EKpub_encrypt, [EKcert_signing], [EKcert_encrypt], AKpub, TPM2_Certify(EKpub, AKpub), PCR_quote, eventlog}) SC0: {TPM2_MakeCredential(EKpub_encrypt, AKpub, session_key), Encrypt_session_key({AKcert, filesystem_keys, etc.})} ``` # Long-Term State Kept by Attestation Services Attestation servers need to keep some long-term state: - binding of `EKpub` and `ID` - PCR validation profile(s) for each identified client Log-like attestation state: - client attestation status (last time successfully attested, last time unsuccessfully attested) 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. Things to log: - client attestation attempts and outcomes - AK certificates issued (WARNING: see note about single round trip attestation protocols above -- do not log AKcerts in public places when using single round trip attestation protocols!) ## 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. # References - [TCG TPM Library part 1: Architecture, sections 23 and 24](https://trustedcomputinggroup.org/wp-content/uploads/TCG_TPM2_r1p59_Part1_Architecture_pub.pdf) - https://sourceforge.net/projects/ibmtpm20acs/ - https://safeboot.dev/ - https://github.com/osresearch/safeboot/