On 22/09/2016 16:59, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 04:45:51PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> The main difference between the SME and SEV encryption, from the point
>> of view of the kernel, is that real-mode always writes unencrypted in
>> SME and always writes encrypted in SEV.  But UEFI can run in 64-bit mode
>> and learn about the C bit, so EFI boot data should be unprotected in SEV
>> guests.
> Actually, it is different: you can start fully encrypted in SME, see:
> https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20160822223539.29880.96739.st...@tlendack-t1.amdoffice.net
> The last paragraph alludes to a certain transparent mode where you're
> already encrypted and only certain pieces like EFI is not encrypted.

Which paragraph?

>> Because the firmware volume is written to high memory in encrypted
>> form, and because the PEI phase runs in 32-bit mode, the firmware
>> code will be encrypted; on the other hand, data that is placed in low
>> memory for the kernel can be unencrypted, thus limiting differences
>> between SME and SEV.
> When you run fully encrypted, you still need to access EFI tables in the
> clear. That's why I'm confused about this patch here.

I might be wrong, but I don't think this patch was tested with OVMF or Duet.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-crypto" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to