On Wed, 2020-09-16 at 13:14 +0200, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote: > CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click > links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the > content is safe. > > > On 16.09.20 10:13, AKASHI Takahiro wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 01:19:03AM +0200, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote: > > > On 9/11/20 7:26 PM, Andrii Voloshyn wrote: > > > > Hi there, > > > > > > > > Does U-boot take into account certificate expiration date when > > > > verifying signed images in FIT? In other words, is date stored along > > > > with the public key in DTB file? > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > Andy > > > > > > > > > > Hello Philippe, > > > > > > looking at padding_pkcs_15_verify() in lib/rsa/rsa-verify.c I cannot > > > find a comparison of the date on which an image was signed with the > > > expiry date of the certificate. Shouldn't there be a check? Or did I > > > simply look into the wrong function? > > > > I think Simon is the right person to answer this question, but > > > > as far as I know, we don't have any device tree property for the expiration > > date of a public key. See doc/uImage.FIT/signature.txt. > > Yes, the problem starts with mkimage not writing the dates available in > the X509 certificate into the device tree. > > The dates are accessible via the X509_get0_notBefore() and > X509_get0_notAfter() functions of the OpenSSL library. > > > Takahiro, could you, please, also look at the UEFI secure boot > implementation in U-Boot. EDK2 validates the dates via the embedded > OpenSSL library in > CryptoPkg/Library/OpensslLib/openssl/crypto/x509/x509_vfy.c, function > verify_chain(). We should not do less.
Does that mean that verified boot stops/fails when the date expires ? How do you guarantee that the device has the correct time ? Jocke