Rich Freeman via plug on 21 Jan 2022 17:21:18 -0800 |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
Re: [PLUG] chip |
On Fri, Jan 21, 2022 at 11:02 AM jeffv via plug <plug@lists.phillylinux.org> wrote: > > For those worried about Microsoft's Pluton TPM chip: Lenovo won't even > switch it on by default in latest ThinkPads I haven't heard of Pluton before, but it just sounds like a TPM implementation. Most CPUs have them built-in these days, if not MS's specific version. They all can be used to lock a motherboard to a signed OS, and newer CPUs also have the ability to be flashed with a one-time signature that can further lock them to a signed firmware. They can also do all the other stuff associated with TPMs like full-disk encryption that only decrypts if the boot path is not tampered with. Linux and grub support TPMs in general - not sure about Pluton specifically but I'm sure they'll add support for it if not. I'm not aware of any distros that take advantage of it, though ChromeOS uses a TPM for user profile encryption in a way that is a little unconventional. I'm just saying this really is nothing new. The TPM on my PC and convertible were both disabled by default in firmware - I enabled them to use bitlocker on the convertible. I do realize that this stuff can be used to lock down hardware, but we've had secure boot for many years now and MS has yet to go back on their promise not to require lockdown for Windows certification. Actually, the last I heard for retail PCs they required it to NOT be locked down to be certified. This is why you can turn off secure boot on all PCs (the exception they made was for some ARM hardware they were selling at a loss though I don't think that went anywhere). If somebody really wanted to they could probably add support to coreboot and a distro so that you'd get an end-to-end signed firmware and OS, using your own CA that you control, such that any tampering with the OS or firmware would disable the device. I think a lot of modern CPUs also support memory encryption, so you could probably also lock the entire thing down. The concept of being able to lock down the hardware isn't a bad thing. It is just that the only people who seem to bother using it are those who would desire to lock the system down against its owner... -- Rich ___________________________________________________________________________ Philadelphia Linux Users Group -- http://www.phillylinux.org Announcements - http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-announce General Discussion -- http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug