pvmfw: Clarify docs about BCC generation in ABL

Test: -
Change-Id: I872ee00d19a2069aae53836e9f1bd992adfdc367
This commit is contained in:
Pierre-Clément Tosi 2023-03-31 09:54:44 +01:00
parent 7898e8578a
commit e5033c0a66
1 changed files with 13 additions and 8 deletions

View File

@ -197,16 +197,21 @@ next-stage secret, and a certificate chain, intended for pVM attestation. Note
that it differs from the `BccHandover` defined by the specification in that its that it differs from the `BccHandover` defined by the specification in that its
`Bcc` field is mandatory (while optional in the original). `Bcc` field is mandatory (while optional in the original).
The handover expected by pvmfw can be generated as follows: Devices that fully implement DICE should provide a certificate rooted at the
Unique Device Secret (UDS) in a boot stage preceding the pvmfw loader (typically
ABL), in such a way that it would receive a valid `BccHandover`, that can be
passed to [`BccHandoverMainFlow`][BccHandoverMainFlow] along with the inputs
described below.
- by passing a `BccHandover` received from a previous boot stage (_e.g._ Trusted Otherwise, as an intermediate step towards supporting DICE throughout the
Firmware, ROM bootloader, ...) to software stack of the device, incomplete implementations may root the BCC at the
[`BccHandoverMainFlow`][BccHandoverMainFlow]; pvmfw loader, using an arbitrary constant as initial CDI. The pvmfw loader can
easily do so by:
- by generating a `BccHandover` (as an example, see [Trusty][Trusty-BCC]) with 1. Building a BCC-less `BccHandover` using CBOR operations
both CDIs set to an arbitrary constant value and no `Bcc`, and pass it to ([example][Trusty-BCC]) and containing the constant CDIs
`BccHandoverMainFlow`, which will both derive the pvmfw CDIs and start a 1. Passing the resulting `BccHandover` to `BccHandoverMainFlow` as described
valid certificate chain, making the pvmfw loader the root of the BCC. above
The recommended DICE inputs at this stage are: The recommended DICE inputs at this stage are: