Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Issues following bg-prov instructions, may be several bugs or user error #356

Open
65a opened this issue Apr 2, 2023 · 6 comments
Open

Comments

@65a
Copy link

65a commented Apr 2, 2023

Thanks for this project, it's awesome!

I am trying to write new bootguard metadata to a sapphire rapids board, and found this, which is perfect. I ran into a few issues.

I'm following use case 1 here: https://github.com/9elements/converged-security-suite/blob/main/cmd/bg-prov/README.md

First, bg-prov template foo.cfg doesn't exist, but I looked at the help output and found bg-prov template-v-2 foo.cfg should be right. I get a nil pointer dereference:

$ ./bg-prov template-v-2 ./bg2.cfg
panic: runtime error: invalid memory address or nil pointer dereference
[signal SIGSEGV: segmentation violation code=0x1 addr=0x0 pc=0x5a01be]

goroutine 1 [running]:
github.com/linuxboot/fiano/pkg/intel/metadata/bg/bgbootpolicy.(*Manifest).WriteTo(0x0, {0x79af60, 0xc0002318f0})
	/home/user/go/pkg/mod/github.com/linuxboot/[email protected]/pkg/intel/metadata/bg/bgbootpolicy/manifest_manifestcodegen.go:209 +0x3e
github.com/9elements/converged-security-suite/v2/pkg/provisioning/bootguard.(*BootGuard).WriteBPM(0xc000231800)
	/home/user/devel/converged-security-suite/pkg/provisioning/bootguard/bootguard.go:331 +0x5a
main.(*templateCmdv2).Run(0x976ee0, 0x1?)
	/home/user/devel/converged-security-suite/cmd/bg-prov/cmd.go:910 +0x3d3
reflect.Value.call({0x6d2ae0?, 0x976ee0?, 0x44d1d6?}, {0x722762, 0x4}, {0xc000013b48, 0x1, 0x1?})
	/usr/lib/go/src/reflect/value.go:586 +0xb07
reflect.Value.Call({0x6d2ae0?, 0x976ee0?, 0x6dd540?}, {0xc000013b48?, 0x721240?, 0x0?})
	/usr/lib/go/src/reflect/value.go:370 +0xbc
github.com/alecthomas/kong.callMethod({0x72256c, 0x3}, {0x719760?, 0x976ee0?, 0x3?}, {0x6d2ae0?, 0x976ee0?, 0x0?}, 0x0?)
	/home/user/go/pkg/mod/github.com/alecthomas/[email protected]/callbacks.go:95 +0x4fa
github.com/alecthomas/kong.(*Context).RunNode(0xc00011a600, 0xc000167680, {0xc000125f00, 0x1, 0x1})
	/home/user/go/pkg/mod/github.com/alecthomas/[email protected]/context.go:755 +0x60f
github.com/alecthomas/kong.(*Context).Run(0x6b83e0?, {0xc000125f00?, 0xc000125f30?, 0x4408b1?})
	/home/user/go/pkg/mod/github.com/alecthomas/[email protected]/context.go:780 +0x14e
main.main()
	/home/user/devel/converged-security-suite/cmd/bg-prov/main.go:31 +0x29e

I can read-config, so I generated a config.json from an existing image. You can take a publically available image from SuperMicro for example, but I suspect any Sapphire Rapids (or W790?) image will suffice. This works, so I keep following the steps.

I get as far as:
/bg-prov bpm-gen-v-2 ./bpm_unsigned.bin ./oem_bios.bin --config=./oem.cfg
which just gives me

can't identify bootguard header
WriteBPM: can't identify bootguard header

I'm new to this, so I may be doing something terribly wrong here. Let's assume the fuses are not locked in the ME, so replacing keys here should be ok if I understand correctly. I'd like to resign an existing BIOS with my own keys.

@65a 65a changed the title Issues following bg-prov instructions, may be several bugs. Issues following bg-prov instructions, may be several bugs or user error Apr 2, 2023
@xaionaro
Copy link
Collaborator

xaionaro commented Apr 5, 2023

Hello.

Do you mind sharing the files you used to reproduce this problem? Or otherwise could you try branch bugfix/cbnt-prov-typo and check if it works?

@65a
Copy link
Author

65a commented Apr 6, 2023

You can download an example BIOS at https://www.supermicro.com/en/support/resources/downloadcenter/firmware/MBD-X13SEM-TF/BIOS (I suspect all X13 LGA4677 boards will have the same issues). I see there is an SPR-SP branch too, which is probably needed as well for these boards.

Running bugfix branch, this problem seems unrelated to your change (codegen?):

$ ./bg-prov template-v-2 test
panic: runtime error: invalid memory address or nil pointer dereference
[signal SIGSEGV: segmentation violation code=0x1 addr=0x0 pc=0x5a01be]

goroutine 1 [running]:
github.com/linuxboot/fiano/pkg/intel/metadata/bg/bgbootpolicy.(*Manifest).WriteTo(0x0, {0x79af60, 0xc0002318f0})
	/home/user/go/pkg/mod/github.com/linuxboot/[email protected]/pkg/intel/metadata/bg/bgbootpolicy/manifest_manifestcodegen.go:209 +0x3e
github.com/9elements/converged-security-suite/v2/pkg/provisioning/bootguard.(*BootGuard).WriteBPM(0xc000231800)
	/home/user/devel/converged-security-suite/pkg/provisioning/bootguard/bootguard.go:331 +0x5a
main.(*templateCmdv2).Run(0x976e40, 0x1?)
	/home/user/devel/converged-security-suite/cmd/bg-prov/cmd.go:910 +0x3d3
reflect.Value.call({0x6d2ae0?, 0x976e40?, 0x44d1d6?}, {0x722762, 0x4}, {0xc000013b48, 0x1, 0x1?})
	/usr/lib/go/src/reflect/value.go:586 +0xb07
reflect.Value.Call({0x6d2ae0?, 0x976e40?, 0x6dd540?}, {0xc000013b48?, 0x721240?, 0x0?})
	/usr/lib/go/src/reflect/value.go:370 +0xbc
github.com/alecthomas/kong.callMethod({0x72256c, 0x3}, {0x719760?, 0x976e40?, 0x3?}, {0x6d2ae0?, 0x976e40?, 0x0?}, 0x0?)
	/home/user/go/pkg/mod/github.com/alecthomas/[email protected]/callbacks.go:95 +0x4fa
github.com/alecthomas/kong.(*Context).RunNode(0xc00011a600, 0xc000167680, {0xc000125f00, 0x1, 0x1})
	/home/user/go/pkg/mod/github.com/alecthomas/[email protected]/context.go:755 +0x60f
github.com/alecthomas/kong.(*Context).Run(0x6b83e0?, {0xc000125f00?, 0xc000125f30?, 0x4408b1?})
	/home/user/go/pkg/mod/github.com/alecthomas/[email protected]/context.go:780 +0x14e
main.main()
	/home/user/devel/converged-security-suite/cmd/bg-prov/main.go:31 +0x29e

Continuing on:
./bg-prov read-config test bios.bin works fine, contents of test seem legitimate.
./bg-prov key-gen RSA3072 "" --path=sign works fine
This is a new problem, I think:

$ ./bg-prov km-gen-v-2 ./km_unsigned.bin signkm_priv.pem --config test --pkhashalg SHA384 --bpmpubkey signbpm_pub.pem --bpmhashalgo SHA384
bg-prov: error: asn1: structure error: tags don't match (16 vs {class:0 tag:2 length:1 isCompound:false}) {optional:false explicit:false application:false private:false defaultValue:<nil> tag:<nil> stringType:0 timeType:0 set:false omitEmpty:false} AlgorithmIdentifier @2

Note that trying the above with 2048 keys/algo 14 also fails with a similar message.

@xaionaro
Copy link
Collaborator

xaionaro commented Apr 6, 2023

github.com/linuxboot/fiano/pkg/intel/metadata/bg/bgbootpolicy.(*Manifest).WriteTo(0x0, {0x79af60, 0xc0002318f0})
	/home/user/go/pkg/mod/github.com/linuxboot/[email protected]/pkg/intel/metadata/bg/bgbootpolicy/manifest_manifestcodegen.go:209 +0x3e
github.com/9elements/converged-security-suite/v2/pkg/provisioning/bootguard.(*BootGuard).WriteBPM(0xc000231800)
	/home/user/devel/converged-security-suite/pkg/provisioning/bootguard/bootguard.go:331 +0x5a
main.(*templateCmdv2).Run(0x976e40, 0x1?)

Does not look right. Are you sure you are working from that branch? In that branch it should get to pkg/intel/metadata/cbnt instead of pkg/intel/metadata/bg from pkg/provisioning/bootguard/bootguard.go:331.

I hope I won't forget to investigate this on the next week :(

@ansiwen
Copy link

ansiwen commented Aug 10, 2023

I have exactly the same issue on main branch. Also template-v-1 does not create a JSON file, but a binary, and looking at the code it seems that the template-v-1 and template-v-2 commands indeed don't create JSON files, but BPM files. See here:

bBPM, err := bootguard.WriteBPM()
if err != nil {
return err
}
if err = os.WriteFile(t.Path, bBPM, 0600); err != nil {
return fmt.Errorf("unable to write BPM to file: %w", err)
}

@65a
Copy link
Author

65a commented Aug 11, 2023

I'm definitely still interested in getting this project working for SPR, though I ran into some other annoyances with Supermicro particularly DRMing their board to their own keys with an external FPGA (something they call RoT, but I might dispute the T). This may be bypassable, but I have another board which is hopefully less annoying. Let me know if there's anything I can test, I'll likely try again soon.

@zaolin
Copy link
Collaborator

zaolin commented Sep 5, 2023

Related to #355

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants