Hi All,
FYI, per Shebu, I'm adding both mbed-tls(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org and
psa-crypto(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org to the MBed TLS Tech Forum invites.
Please look for this in your inbox and accept it if you would like the
series added to your calendar.
- Note that this is a monthly meeting but you will see two invites, one
that is for Asia timezones and one for Europe/US. Just delete the series
that isn't timezone friendly for you.
- FYI, recall that this and other tech forums can be found in the meeting
calendar on the TF website <https://www.trustedfirmware.org/meetings/>.
If you see a meeting in that calendar, click on the entry and an option
comes up saying "copy to my calendar." It will import that single instance
into your personal calendar from there if you wish. I wasn't able to test
this feature with outlook, but it worked fine for google calendar.
Please let me know if you have any questions.
Best regards,
Don Harbin
TrustedFirmware Community Manager
don.harbin(a)linaro.org
Hi Abhishek, TSC representatives,
We're doing some changes when it comes to the Linaro TF TSC representatives.
- I'm stepping out (but I'm still around in Linaro).
- David Brown becomes the main Linaro TF TSC rep.
- Ruchika Gupta steps in as the backfill for David when he is unable to
attend.
Please update mailing-lists and meeting invitations etc accordingly.
Regards,
Joakim
Hi All,
Please find the minutes from this morning's meeting below.
Also, find attached Ruchika's presentation.
Best regards
Don Harbin - Sent on behalf of the TSC Chair
=================================================
Attendees: Don, Kevin Townsend(Linaro), Ruchika Gupta(Linaro), Julius
Werner(Google), Miklos Balint, David Brown(Linaro), Joakim Bech(Linaro),
Gyorgy Szing, Kangkang Shen(Futurewei), Abhishek Pandit(Arm), Lionel
DEBIEVE(ST),
Konstantin Karasev(OMP), Andrej Butok(NXP), Matteo, Kevin Oerton(NXM Labs)
Minutes:
-
OP-TEE Roadmap: Ruchika - Linaro Security Working Group Tech Lead
-
GET SLIDES
-
Reviewed Focus areas
-
OP-TEE and Virtualization
-
Functional Safety Updates
-
Proposal of task ownership shown
-
Share H/W resources
-
Roadmap - Details
-
Note the Jira Tickets are public and accessible by the team
-
Ruchika provided a brief overview of Stratos
<https://www.linaro.org/projects/#automotive_STR> (Linaro driven
Virtualization Project) and TS
<https://www.linaro.org/projects/#trusted-substrate_TS>(Linaro driven
Trusted Substrate project).
-
KK: Re: Trusted Substrate - it’s a platform to support
firmware-level security features. Related to SOAFEE. Edge focused
-
Abhishek: Partner Lightning Talks - round robin usage of TF
-
Interest in lightning talks and sharing how their company is using
the output of TF.org, one Member share monthly in this meeting.
-
Will push out the vote for doing this.
-
KO: Initial target is to start in December?
-
AP: Suggest starting in January
-
KO: Will talk thru email, but pencil in Kevin for January
<end>
Hi All,
Sorry a bit late for this week's meeting. We have -
* OPTEE roadmap presentation. (Please note that meeting has been moved 2 hours earlier.)
* Revisit - lightning talks proposal?
*
Any other agenda suggestions?
Thanks,
Abhishek
Hi All,
Please find the minutes from yesterday's TSC Tech Form below.
Best regards,
Don - Sent on behalf of the TSC Chair
==============================================
Attendees: Joakim Bech(Linaro), Don, Abhishek Pandit(Arm), Anton Komlev
<Anton.Komlev(a)arm.com>(Arm), Dan Handley(Arm), Kevin Oerton(NXM Labs),
David Brown(Linaro), Julius Werner <jwerner(a)google.com>(Google), Andrej
Butok(NXP), Eric Finco(ST), Michael T(Renesas)
Minutes:
-
Security Incident Reporting Review
-
Reference Joakims email thread
-
Joakim shared the background. Working to simplify. Walked thru a
sample incident process spreadsheet.
-
DB: How consistent in alerting additional Stakeholders?
-
Joakim: reference Phabricator page to answer the question.
-
Joakim: Process requires discipline. Shared checklist.
-
Each issue would have its own checklist.
-
KO: Looks good and provides the picture we need
-
KO: Why manual process?
-
JB: See checklist - must add dates
-
DanH: New tab for each checklist may be hard to sustain.
-
KO: Automation would be nice
-
AP: What is this solving?
-
KO: From Technical oversight, this provides a high-level view of
security robustness and responsiveness to issues. May be a
useful mgt tool
to understand security state and velocity is sufficient.
-
DB: With Zephyr, a checklist for each issue has caught things that
would have been missed, like publishing to MITRE.
-
DanH, AP: Agree checklists seem useful.
-
AP: Doesn’t include effort. What metric is needed?
-
DB: Need a start and an end, which doesn’t happen in this.
-
MT: Renesas uses Jira. Excel is tough - not scalable and can’t export
-
AP: What is the use of date for each transition?
-
DB: Checklists, and states in Jira. Jira is not trivial either and
must be tuned when changes are made. Clickup or Airtable might be good
choices. Scriptable is helpful. Not free solutions.
-
KO: Air table is $60 / month. Development/maintenance is the real
cost.
-
DanH: Corner cases are abundant and can skew statistics.
-
DB: Current sheet is a report, the data is the dates.
-
AP: Only stats that matter is when Opened and When closed. If
lock-on purpose, then can decide what data is needed.
-
DB: On zephyr, patches are done by others rather than the security
team, which makes it difficult. What happens when a 3rd party comes in?
-
DanH: Could be a case but hasn’t happened.
-
Agreed to table this and discuss again in a month
-
Phabricator Deprecation:
-
Noted raised and not discussed. Will discuss later
-
TF-M Release cadence change
-
Anton: From 4 to 6 months. Minimizes overhead associated with
releases
-
KO: Keeping the window open allows better synchronization.
-
Anton: Each project is different. Smaller windows have a better
chance to overlap.
-
EF: How aligns w/ MCUBoot?
-
Anton: No formal plan there, we pick it up asap.
-
EF: 2 versions in a time window. Make sure MCUBoot release is done 6
weeks before, for example, so can be merged in
-
Anton: This aligns with the purpose of this proposal. TF-A also has 6
months schedule.
-
AP: MBed TLS starting open tech Forum.
-
AP: ADAC repo - top-level repo now available. Expect a tech talk in the
future
-
AP: Roadmap discussions: None this month as it was covered last month,
plan to do every month. If can have lightning talks from Member reps on
how they’re using TF.org projects and are public. Still deciding if useful
and how to organize?
-
KO: A sense of how this is getting leveraged is the ultimate end
goal. A google project w/ BOM is being tracked for security issues that
impact other projects.
-
AP: Feel free to provide Abhishek feedback outside this forum
-
AP: Funding approval for Open CI. All aware
-
DonH: FYI includes reduction of Community Mgr to 0.3 to maintain a
healthy surplus. Also, the majority votes are in and it has passed.
-
Joakim: Can now compile OP TEE TA’s in Rust
<end>
Hi All,
Any agenda suggestions for this week's meeting?
Couple of potential topics :
* Security incident monitoring
* Phabricator deprecation
Thanks,
Abhishek
Hi All,
In case you missed a session of interest at Linaro Connect, the recorded
sessions and accompanying presentations are now posted on line
<https://connect.linaro.org/resources/lvc21f/lvc21f-212>.
I've attached a Session Resource List to this email as well that has been
created to quickly find sessions of interest based upon topics.
Best regards,
Don
Attendees:
Dan Handley (Arm, chair)
Joanna Farley (Arm)
Shebu Varghese Kuriakose (Arm)
Matteo Carlini (Arm)
Joakim Bech (Linaro)
David Brown (Linaro)
Don Harbin (Linaro)
Eric Finco (ST)
Lionel Debieve (ST)
KangKang Shen (Futurewei)
Michael Thomas (Renesas)
Julius Werner (Google)
Kevin Oerton (NXMLabs)
Andrey Butok (NXP)
Shebu presented Mbed TLS roadmap (attached)
KO: How will the Crypto Driver API be used.
SK: This is a back-end HAL interface for crypto-processors to plug in to. The front-end interface will always be the PSA Crypto API.
KO: Will this driver API help add support for certs that Mbed TLS doesn't support yet?
Shebu: No, the fron- end interface will always be via the Mbed TLS and PSA Crypto APIs. Adding new cert support would be a separate work item. Currently we're more focussed on new crypto algorithm support.
KO: For A-profile, is there a dependency on the Trusted Services (TS) project?
SVK: TS uses PSA Crypto, as does TF-A. There is some plumbing still to do with FF-A if you want to call PSA Crypto APIs from the normal world and route that through to TS or a Secure Element backend.
MT: When will there be a 3.x LTS branch?
SVK: Will consider the next LTS in 2022. The last 2.x branch will be an LTS. We don't have firm plans for a 3.x LTS branch yet.
MT: Even if you update Mbed TLS to use the PSA Crypto API, some partners will continue to use the legacy Mbed TLS crypto APIs (via Mbed TLS) since they will only use LTS branches. They will not move until there is an LTS that uses the PSA Crypto APIs.
DH: The strategy is to clean up the dependencies on the legacy crypto APIs through the 3.x series of releases. Eventually Mbed TLS will not have a dependency on the legacy APIs. Even then, backwards compatibility will be maintained in the legacy APIs. Support for the legacy APIs would not be removed until a (TBD) 4.0 release.
KO: Is there any overhead to using PSA Crypto API.
SVK: We haven't actually measured this.
DH: There will be a small overhead in the current implementation as these effectively wrap the legacy API implementations. There's no overhead due to the APIs themselves. Through the 3.x series of releases, the implementation will be inverted so that the legacy APIs will wrap the PSA Crypto API implementations. Then the overhead will be in the legacy implementation instead.
Matteo presented the TF-A roadmap: https://developer.trustedfirmware.org/w/tf_a/roadmap/
EF: What is firmware transparency? Is it a device side or server side technology?
MC: It's related to firmware attestation, which is about collecting firmware measurements and providing them to a relying party in the form of an attestation token.
DH: Actually, it’s a bit orthogonal to attestation. Attestation is about providing evidence to a (possibly remote) relying party in order enable functionality (e.g. provisioning of secrets).
DH: Firmware transparency is about making that evidence (in the form of certificates) available to anyone in a verifiable data store, so they can trust the firmware on a device is what it says it is
JB: So it's similar to TPM?
DH: Hmm, not exactly but the measurements may be stored in a TPM on the device.
DH: The project we’re interested in here is Google Trillian: https://opensource.google/projects/trillian
DH: This is really a server side technology but there may be some alignment activities to do on the device side
EF: What is the 32-bit support about in the roadmap?
SVK: This is related to Trusted Services (TS). It's about running legacy 32-bit TAs within TS, which is extra work
MC: Phabricator page for this: https://developer.trustedfirmware.org/w/tf_a/roadmap/
MC: Plan is to create a common landing page with Don for all roadmaps
AOB:
DH: Someone in Arm pointed out that the tagline on the tf.org website is not strictly accurate:
"OPEN SOURCE SECURE WORLD SOFTWARE"
DH: Some of the software does not necessarily reside in the secure world (e.g. Mbed TLS, Trusted Services, Future CCA support)
DH: Proposal is to just remove the word "World".
JK: Makes sense. I thought that too.
(No-one disagreed)
SVK: There's another reference on that page too.
DH: Yes, we may need to remove this in several places on the website.
ACTION: Dan to work with Don on changing "secure world" to "secure" on the website
JB: Board wanted more visibility into the security process, e.g. how fast are we to respond, what issues are in flight, etc...
DH: OK, as long as this isn't leaking security critical info to people who are not necessarily part of the security teams.
JB: Yes, of course. This is just about seeing how well the process is working, not the issues themselves
DH: My other concern is not putting too much extra process on the security teams.
JB: I have an action to propose something that is workable here.
DonH: Would like more of the tech people on the teams to propose topics at future conferences, e.g. the OSFC
DH: Arm folk have quite a few presentations at last week's LVC but perhaps not OSFC.
DonH: Yes, I was looking for more than just Arm people.
Regards
Dan.
-----Original Appointment-----
From: Don Harbin <don.harbin(a)linaro.org<mailto:don.harbin@linaro.org>>
Sent: 14 April 2021 15:08
To: Don Harbin; Joakim Bech; Bill Fletcher (bill.fletcher(a)linaro.org<mailto:bill.fletcher@linaro.org>); lionel.debieve(a)st.com<mailto:lionel.debieve@st.com>; andrey.butok(a)nxp.com<mailto:andrey.butok@nxp.com>; Nicusor Penisoara; Abhishek Pandit; Eric Finco (eric.finco(a)st.com<mailto:eric.finco@st.com>); k.karasev(a)omprussia.ru<mailto:k.karasev@omprussia.ru>; kevin(a)nxmlabs.com<mailto:kevin@nxmlabs.com>; David Brown; David Cocca; kangkang.shen(a)futurewei.com<mailto:kangkang.shen@futurewei.com>; Dan Handley; roman.baker(a)cypress.com<mailto:roman.baker@cypress.com>; Kevin Townsend (kevin.townsend(a)linaro.org<mailto:kevin.townsend@linaro.org>); reinauer(a)google.com<mailto:reinauer@google.com>; Serban Constantinescu; a.rybakov(a)omprussia.ru<mailto:a.rybakov@omprussia.ru>; Julius Werner; roman.baker(a)infineon.com<mailto:roman.baker@infineon.com>
Subject: Trusted Firmware TSC
When: 16 September 2021 09:00-09:55 America/Los_Angeles.
Where: https://linaro-org.zoom.us/j/96393644990?pwd=VXlGeFF1Z2U3UTlwbmNhRTZYeE5lZz…
This event has been changed with this note:
"Adjusting due to time zone changes"
Trusted Firmware TSC
When
Changed: Monthly from 9am to 9:55am on the third Thursday 9 times Mountain Standard Time - Phoenix
Where
https://linaro-org.zoom.us/j/96393644990?pwd=VXlGeFF1Z2U3UTlwbmNhRTZYeE5lZz… (map<https://www.google.com/url?q=https%3A%2F%2Flinaro-org.zoom.us%2Fj%2F9639364…>)
Calendar
dan.handley(a)arm.com<mailto:dan.handley@arm.com>
Who
•
Don Harbin - organizer
•
Joakim Bech
•
Bill Fletcher
•
lionel.debieve(a)st.com<mailto:lionel.debieve@st.com>
•
andrey.butok(a)nxp.com<mailto:andrey.butok@nxp.com>
•
nicusor.penisoara(a)nxp.com<mailto:nicusor.penisoara@nxp.com>
•
abhishek.pandit(a)arm.com<mailto:abhishek.pandit@arm.com>
•
eric.finco(a)st.com<mailto:eric.finco@st.com>
•
k.karasev(a)omprussia.ru<mailto:k.karasev@omprussia.ru>
•
kevin(a)nxmlabs.com<mailto:kevin@nxmlabs.com>
•
David Brown
•
david.cocca(a)renesas.com<mailto:david.cocca@renesas.com>
•
kangkang.shen(a)futurewei.com<mailto:kangkang.shen@futurewei.com>
•
dan.handley(a)arm.com<mailto:dan.handley@arm.com>
•
roman.baker(a)cypress.com<mailto:roman.baker@cypress.com>
•
kevin.townsend(a)linaro.org<mailto:kevin.townsend@linaro.org>
•
reinauer(a)google.com<mailto:reinauer@google.com>
•
Serban Constantinescu
•
a.rybakov(a)omprussia.ru<mailto:a.rybakov@omprussia.ru>
•
Julius Werner
•
roman.baker(a)infineon.com<mailto:roman.baker@infineon.com>
more details »<https://calendar.google.com/calendar/event?action=VIEW&eid=c2NxdnQzczZubWpt…>
Trusted Firmware is inviting you to a scheduled Zoom meeting.
Topic: TrustedFirmware TSC
Time: Dec 17, 2020 05:00 PM London
Every month on the Third Thu, 12 occurrence(s)
Dec 17, 2020 05:00 PM
Jan 21, 2021 05:00 PM
Feb 18, 2021 05:00 PM
Mar 18, 2021 05:00 PM
Apr 15, 2021 05:00 PM
May 20, 2021 05:00 PM
Jun 17, 2021 05:00 PM
Jul 15, 2021 05:00 PM
Aug 19, 2021 05:00 PM
Sep 16, 2021 05:00 PM
Oct 21, 2021 05:00 PM
Nov 18, 2021 05:00 PM
Please download and import the following iCalendar (.ics) files to your calendar system.
Monthly: https://linaro-org.zoom.us/meeting/tJIufuquqj8jE9QUXZNeFMnKKzozNj9SWM72/ics…<https://www.google.com/url?q=https%3A%2F%2Flinaro-org.zoom.us%2Fmeeting%2Ft…>
Join Zoom Meeting
https://linaro-org.zoom.us/j/96393644990?pwd=VXlGeFF1Z2U3UTlwbmNhRTZYeE5lZz…<https://www.google.com/url?q=https%3A%2F%2Flinaro-org.zoom.us%2Fj%2F9639364…>
Meeting ID: 963 9364 4990
Passcode: roadRunner
One tap mobile
+13462487799,,96393644990# US (Houston)
+16699009128,,96393644990# US (San Jose)
Dial by your location
+1 346 248 7799 US (Houston)
+1 669 900 9128 US (San Jose)
+1 253 215 8782 US (Tacoma)
+1 312 626 6799 US (Chicago)
+1 646 558 8656 US (New York)
+1 301 715 8592 US (Washington D.C)
877 853 5247 US Toll-free
888 788 0099 US Toll-free
Meeting ID: 963 9364 4990
Find your local number: https://linaro-org.zoom.us/u/aegtEd7Roj<https://www.google.com/url?q=https%3A%2F%2Flinaro-org.zoom.us%2Fu%2FaegtEd7…>
Going (dan.handley(a)arm.com<mailto:dan.handley@arm.com>)? All events in this series: Yes<https://calendar.google.com/calendar/event?action=RESPOND&eid=c2NxdnQzczZub…> - Maybe<https://calendar.google.com/calendar/event?action=RESPOND&eid=c2NxdnQzczZub…> - No<https://calendar.google.com/calendar/event?action=RESPOND&eid=c2NxdnQzczZub…> more options »<https://calendar.google.com/calendar/event?action=VIEW&eid=c2NxdnQzczZubWpt…>
Invitation from Google Calendar<https://calendar.google.com/calendar/>
You are receiving this courtesy email at the account dan.handley(a)arm.com<mailto:dan.handley@arm.com> because you are an attendee of this event.
To stop receiving future updates for this event, decline this event. Alternatively you can sign up for a Google account at https://calendar.google.com/calendar/ and control your notification settings for your entire calendar.
Forwarding this invitation could allow any recipient to send a response to the organizer and be added to the guest list, or invite others regardless of their own invitation status, or to modify your RSVP. Learn More<https://support.google.com/calendar/answer/37135#forwarding>.
Abhishek, all
referring to the minutes of our July meeting - see point highlighted in yellow below, TF-A was foreseen as the focus topic of the next TSC meeting. It was expected to take place in August but the August meeting has been cancelled so is TF-A slot postponed accordingly meaning is it the main topic of this week TSC ?
Regards,
Eric
[Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: logo_big5]
Eric FINCO | Tel: +33 (0)2 4402 7154
MDG | Technical Specialist
Fellow, Technical Staff College (TSC) France Board Chairman
From: TSC <tsc-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> On Behalf Of Don Harbin via TSC
Sent: mardi 3 août 2021 17:07
To: tsc(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Subject: [TF-TSC] July 20 Trusted Firmware TSC Meeting minutes
Hi,
Please find the minutes from the last call below
Attendees: Don, Abhishek, Anton Komlev<mailto:Anton.Komlev@arm.com>, Dave Cocca, David Brown, Shebu, Julius, Andrej Bujok, Eric Finco, Michael Thomas, Kevin Oerton, Kevin Townsend
Minutes:
* TF-M release / roadmap update - Shebu
* See slides
* 1.4.0 - 4 months release cadence
* Docs deficiencies have been a focus.
* Need MCU update to Mbed TLS 3.0 - getting support from David Brown.
* Asure RTOS work within Linaro - a couple of Pull Requests are queued
* EF: Patches limited to TF-M?
* SK: In Azure RTOS and Threadx
* MT: Jump to 3.0 pretty big?
* MT: Calls only to PSA crypto?
* SK: Ongoing, uses a mix of legacy and later API's
* SK: Community push for clean-ups before migration is completed. Not a completion point for PSA crypto.
* SK: A new LTS will happen this quarter
* Public Roadmap Slide
* Anton provided overview
* SK: Looking at profiling to understand context switching overhead when go from Normal to Secure World
* Authentication Debug Access Control (ADAC) development being looked at and how to migrate to TF-M
* MT: PSA ADAC Spec: Location?
* SK: In the PSA specification page
* EF: Concerning F/W Update, some services enhancements in 1.4 - duration?
* SK: Picked up f/w update service. So as spec evolves so will work.
* SK: Listed a couple of others...
* AK: Protocol update of Flash w/ progress line. Minor
* TF-M Security Patch Release Proposal
* See WIki
* AK: Walked thru https://developer.trustedfirmware.org/w/collaboration/tf_m_security_patch_r…
* DC: Will review this and provide feedback.
* MT: Some wording seems like could be updated, but the intent is fine.
* MT/AK agree on the wording and raise a vote (if required). Will do a "No objection" next meeting
* Discussion about TSC feedback - AP
* Shebu/Matteo/Abhishek/Dan have had syncs. Lots done by Arm teams. A need for something from TSC to discuss. Suggesting to put all roadmaps on the wiki. Frequency TBD (release cycles?)
* Would like 2 weeks notice on technical topic requests.
* Once public roadmap, will make discussions easier.
* TF-M today, next up will be other projects
* Next TF-A, MBed TLS, Hafnium, Trusted Services.
* EF: Date for next meeting?
* AP: Only time to skip is when meetings are not available.
* Team: Agrees this flow is useful and gives good visibility.
* Details can be found _in the comments_ on: https://developer.trustedfirmware.org/w/collaboration/community_development…
§ Don: Action to Board on TSC needs?
· Shebu: Have TSC reps joined the board to share?
· AP: Will come up w/ questions posed to the board over the next month. September may be the appropriate time to have Board attendance. In TSC, can then formulate and make it more specific.
ACTION: AP come up with a list of topics/questions for the September joint TSC/Board meeting.
Best regards,
Don Harbin - Sent on behalf of the TSC Chair
ST Restricted
Hi,
Please find the minutes from the last call below
Attendees: Don, Abhishek, Anton Komlev <Anton.Komlev(a)arm.com>, Dave Cocca,
David Brown, Shebu, Julius, Andrej Bujok, Eric Finco, Michael Thomas, Kevin
Oerton, Kevin Townsend
Minutes:
-
TF-M release / roadmap update - Shebu
-
See slides
-
1.4.0 - 4 months release cadence
-
Docs deficiencies have been a focus.
-
Need MCU update to Mbed TLS 3.0 - getting support from David Brown.
-
Asure RTOS work within Linaro - a couple of Pull Requests are queued
-
EF: Patches limited to TF-M?
-
SK: In Azure RTOS and Threadx
-
MT: Jump to 3.0 pretty big?
-
MT: Calls only to PSA crypto?
-
SK: Ongoing, uses a mix of legacy and later API’s
-
SK: Community push for clean-ups before migration is completed.
Not a completion point for PSA crypto.
-
SK: A new LTS will happen this quarter
-
Public Roadmap Slide
-
Anton provided overview
-
SK: Looking at profiling to understand context switching overhead
when go from Normal to Secure World
-
Authentication Debug Access Control (ADAC) development being
looked at and how to migrate to TF-M
-
MT: PSA ADAC Spec: Location?
-
SK: In the PSA specification page
-
EF: Concerning F/W Update, some services enhancements in 1.4 -
duration?
-
SK: Picked up f/w update service. So as spec evolves so will
work.
-
SK: Listed a couple of others…
-
AK: Protocol update of Flash w/ progress line. Minor
-
TF-M Security Patch Release Proposal
-
See WIki
-
AK: Walked thru
https://developer.trustedfirmware.org/w/collaboration/tf_m_security_patch_r…
-
DC: Will review this and provide feedback.
-
MT: Some wording seems like could be updated, but the intent is
fine.
-
MT/AK agree on the wording and raise a vote (if required). Will
do a “No objection” next meeting
-
Discussion about TSC feedback - AP
-
Shebu/Matteo/Abhishek/Dan have had syncs. Lots done by Arm teams.
A need for something from TSC to discuss. Suggesting to put
all roadmaps
on the wiki. Frequency TBD (release cycles?)
-
Would like 2 weeks notice on technical topic requests.
-
Once public roadmap, will make discussions easier.
-
TF-M today, next up will be other projects
-
Next TF-A, MBed TLS, Hafnium, Trusted Services.
-
EF: Date for next meeting?
-
AP: Only time to skip is when meetings are not available.
-
Team: Agrees this flow is useful and gives good visibility.
-
Details can be found _in the comments_ on:
https://developer.trustedfirmware.org/w/collaboration/community_development…
-
Don: Action to Board on TSC needs?
-
Shebu: Have TSC reps joined the board to share?
-
AP: Will come up w/ questions posed to the board over the next
month. September may be the appropriate time to have Board
attendance. In
TSC, can then formulate and make it more specific.
ACTION: AP come up with a list of topics/questions for the September joint
TSC/Board meeting.
Best regards,
Don Harbin - Sent on behalf of the TSC Chair
Thanks Eric. Added that to the agenda.
From: Eric FINCO <eric.finco(a)st.com>
Sent: 13 July 2021 12:56
To: Abhishek Pandit <Abhishek.Pandit(a)arm.com>; tsc-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Subject: RE: TSC Agenda 15 Jul 2021
Hi Abhishek and all,
I suggest the following if you think it is possible:
-Update on TF-M V1.4 content as the code freeze date is approaching
-I noticed the TF-M roadmap on Phabricator was updated 10days ago. Can we go through the changes and get comments ?
Regards,
Eric
[Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: logo_big5]
Eric FINCO | Tel: +33 (0)2 4402 7154
MDG | Technical Specialist
ST Restricted
From: TSC <tsc-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org<mailto:tsc-bounces@lists.trustedfirmware.org>> On Behalf Of Abhishek Pandit via TSC
Sent: mardi 13 juillet 2021 13:13
To: tsc(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org<mailto:tsc@lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Subject: [TF-TSC] TSC Agenda 15 Jul 2021
Hi All,
Any agenda items for this week's meeting?
On my list at the moment -
* TF-M security patch release.
* TSC feedback. Action items against me.
Thanks,
Abhishek
Hi All,
Any agenda items for this week's meeting?
On my list at the moment -
* TF-M security patch release.
* TSC feedback. Action items against me.
Thanks,
Abhishek
Hi All,
This is a reminder that the Linaro Connect call for session proposal *deadline
is July 13th*. See details here: https://connect.linaro.org
Connect has historically had a strong representation of TF-related
sessions, so I wanted to encourage all to consider submitting proposals
again for the upcoming Connect (Sept 8-10). It remains a virtual event.
Best regards,
Don
FYI for any of you that missed the CCA event and are interested in watching
the recordings.
Don
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: François Ozog <francois.ozog(a)linaro.org>
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2021 at 07:53
Subject: Arm/Linaro confidential computing architecture event resources
Hi
The recorded event is available at:
https://connect.linaro.org/resources/arm-cca/
This has been a great event with deep technical content.
A key element is the enablement through the Verifier which allows a third
party to play a trust role between the cloud customer and the cloud
provider. It has been the missing link of all processor vendor proposed
confidential computing technologies I've seen so far. An open governance
project is associated: https://github.com/veraison
Cheers
FF
Hi All,
Please find minutes/actions from last week's TF TSC below.
If any questions or corrections, please let me know.
Best regards,
Don Harbin - sent on behalf of TF TSC Chair
Attendees: Don Harbin, Abhishek Pandit, Kevin Oerton, Dave Cocca, Eric
Finco, Julius Werner, Joakim Bech, Kevin Townsend, Dan Handley, Michael
Thomas(Renesas), David Brown
Action Items:
-
Abhishek: Keep the TSC informed of important decisions made.
-
Abhishek: Check to see if Tech Leads can come in and present plans.
-
Don: Ask the board if they need items from TSC.
-
Abhishek: Discuss with Tech Leads about participating in the TSC and
informing about major changes. Present results at next TSC.
-
Abhishek: Plan bi-annual roadmap discussions and the possibility of
public versions in TSC
-
Abhishek: Add “Phabricator transition planning” as a future TSC agenda
item.
-
*Abhishek*: Create a wiki space for TSC members to provide ideas on what
they would like to see in the TSC meeting.
Minutes:
-
TF-M Patchlist proposal
-
AP: Should this be left for today? About TF-M tightening up the
wording?
-
DC: Sounds OK. It seemed OK, the main issue is that we would like to
tackle the LTS issue - as brought up in the Board meeting.
Understood this
may require additional funding
-
AP: Waiting for TF-M PL team to approve. Once they confirm, Plan to
move forward. Haven’t heard, so I will bring up in the next meeting.
-
TSC Feedback
-
AP: Will create a page for members to comment on. Would like comments
-
https://developer.trustedfirmware.org/w/collaboration/community_development…
-
TSC decision for returning TF projects to Github
-
DanH: Agree a good idea, but want to continue Gerrit use. May want
to re-look given feedback.
-
JB: Summary - don’t have technical agenda or discussions - taking
place in other forums and 1:1’s. The items are happening in
other places.
Much is around CI and testing, so if not leading Architecture
and testing,
should we change goals of TF?
-
JW: Agree, processes in other meetings. Perhaps accept that and
evaluate the value of this TSC.
-
EF: Mentions iotmint comment he made. We could give it a try and use
meeting for lookahead? Or is open forum a better format? Should these
open forum items be discussed in this TSC?
-
AP: The technical top level SC to have lightweight topics that cross
projects? There are multiple issues that are common and need to be
handled. If push to board, that’s fine. Having more technical topics in
this TSC - a good thing in general, but they need to be
proposed. Between
Dan and Abhishek, they can handle most topics. So how should Technical
proposals come into TSC?
-
EF: Miss a place where we can discuss what we’re thinking. Sometimes
in Open Forums, but not always in the best format. Where topics
come from
- most of the inputs coming from Arm on significant developments.
-
DanH: Some things that Arm can bring to the table, but they are
semi-periodical. After that, for example, we could discuss the
outputs of
CCA event happening next week.
-
AP: IF someone asks for an Arm expert to present, this is
reasonable. But we need to have members proposing desired
topics. Roadmap
is a good round robin topic - need to have tech leads attend. But deeper
technical topics are still unclear. All TSC members can invite outside
people to present. Agenda comes from members
-
DanH: Roadmaps could be a recurring topic.
-
AP: Roadmaps are on a 6 month cadence, so not a monthly thing
-
MT: TF.org handles tf-m and tf-a. TF-M is more self contained
regarding dependencies vs TF-A.
-
AP: Yes, A has multiple projects in the stack
-
MT: For TF-A, is there coordination between the multiple stacks? OP
TEE for example. Are there cross project discussions?
-
JB: Tends to be 1:1 communications. Is this the forum to add others?
-
MT: Is there a benefit to at least present this in TSC?
-
JB: Makes sense to present merged roadmap views.
-
MT: Probably other examples.
-
AP: Purpose of TSC previously discussed and wanted to keep it light.
If multiple methods, discuss in TSC, else don't get involved. Should TSC
steer any decision making?
-
EF: Back to Michaels example on mbedtls - where should this take
place.
-
MT: A summary of changes being made to x or y project, would help.
-
AP: Where should we have these active conversations? In TSC or
elsewhere?
-
MT: Don’t want tech leads to come in regularly, but occasionally not
a bad idea. As SC, to steer at the right time with right information, SC
can provide the input.
-
AP: Can make a draft to suggest how the TSC could get involved at the
suggested level. So Cortex-A discussions every few months?
-
MT: How does it happen now? Decisions made autonomously per project?
-
DanH: Tech Leads for solutions do discuss in Arm, but a case that
some of these discussions could be brought outside of Arm to TSC.
-
AP: Multiple components.
-
DanH; A proposal to look at solutions in TF.org. Step changes may be
required.
-
AP: Action: Have TSC remain informed of important decisions?
-
DC: Also important topics on the table that want SC and Members to
shape the decision. Aligns with Roadmap - as decisions made,
vet with TSC
to meet member objectives.
-
AP: Possibly if TSC is interested in OP TEE, then join OP TEE Tech
Forum. Or discuss in TSC? Two possibilities.
-
DC: Have resource conflicts. TSC must have enough about overall org
to steer.
-
AP: Agree. Shouldn’t just be informed afterwards, but get involved
earlier to “steer” Have discussed MISRA compliance in the past.
-
MT: A roadmap discussion is a good starting point.
-
DC: Key off milestones in roadmaps can determine when a topic should
be discussed.
-
AP: Action: Need to see if Tech Leads can come in and present plans.
-
DanH: Comes back to how a project is driven forward. By Arm? By
others? A roadmap can be lopsided. What is missing is Tech Mgr/Roadmap
owners across all projects. Arm Tech Mgrs may not always be receptive to
requested changes
-
DC: If someone is not participating, then inputs carry less weight.
-
JB: A look at the product today, mainly Arm/Linaro that drives much
of it. OP TEE roadmap is driven from Linaro Members, for
example, so what
does it mean for TF to own a project?
-
AP: There is an opportunity where if someone brings a topic in, then
a different model. A proposal comes to the table. Then discussed.
-
JB: OP TEE - “can I see roadmaps?” “Talking to Linaro” doesn’t seem
like a good answer.
-
AP: OK with roadmaps to be driven from other orgs.
-
AP: 2 Actions:
-
What do we ask Tech leads to inform
-
How to discuss items in advance on roadmap
-
Think Matteo/Shebu post roadmaps, but can ask if don’t
-
JW: Still not sure how affective the TSC can be with external
activities driving things
-
AP: Aligning w/ Eric’s input and take votes to the board.
-
EF: Still see some potential value on what is happening.
-
JW: Could be emails?
-
AP: Could take this to Tech Leads in Arm and get their thoughts on
willingness to discuss work items.
-
DC: worth a try to see if it could add value.
-
JB: Once example if companies presenting Security incidents on their
own pace. Wanted to publish June 24th, Joakim explained and
they pushed to
July 10th
-
DanH: Need to add Phabricator to the future agenda.
-
AP: *Action*: Ask the board if they need items from TSC.
-
DanH: Off line feedback would be OK.
-
AP: May create a Q & A.
<end>
Reminder - might be of interest to some.
Don
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Kristine Dill <kristine.dill(a)linaro.org>
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2021 at 05:56
Subject: Re: View the agenda and register for Linaro and Arm CCA Tech Event
on June 23
Hi all,
This is a reminder to register for our event next week: Linaro and Arm CCA
Tech Event, Deep dive into the Arm Confidential Compute Architecture
<https://www.linaro.org/events/linaro-and-arm-cca-tech-day-deep-dive-into-ar…>
.
The event is free and open to the public so feel free to share with any
developers who may be interested.
The registration link and schedule can be found here:
https://www.linaro.org/events/linaro-and-arm-cca-tech-day-deep-dive-into-ar…
The event has 6 sessions and starts at 14:00 UTC on June 23 - the schedule
should pick up your local timezone.
Once you register, you'll receive an invite to login to the event platform
PINE on Monday (2 days before the event).
All sessions will be presented live and the platform has a Q&A and chat
window so you can ask questions and interact with the speakers and other
attendees during the event.
Thanks and let me know if you have any questions!
Kristine Dill
Events Manager
Linaro
On Wed, May 26, 2021 at 10:40 AM Kristine Dill <kristine.dill(a)linaro.org>
wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> The agenda is now available for viewing and registration is open for the
> Linaro and Arm CCA Tech Event on June 23! View the agenda and register on
> the event page here:
>
>
> https://www.linaro.org/events/linaro-and-arm-cca-tech-day-deep-dive-into-ar…
>
> The schedule widget should pick up your local timezone. The event begins
> at 14:00 UTC. This event is free and open to anyone, so feel free to share
> the link publicly.
>
> For those who can't attend, videos of sessions will be made available
> after the event on the Connect Resource Page. We'll be using the same
> software we used for Linaro Virtual Connect 2021 (PINEtool.ai). If you've
> registered, you'll receive an email invite from PINE when we get closer to
> the event on June 23.
>
>
> Thanks and let me know if you have any questions.
>
> Kristine
>
>
>
> <https://www.hubspot.com/email-signature-generator?utm_source=create-signatu…>
>
Hi All,
Any agenda items for this week's meeting?
Following topics from previous meeting -
* TF-M security patch release.
Have the teams agreed on this and is this now concluded?
* TSC feedback
I have created a page where people can add their inputs. It is open at the moment, if you feel there is a need to restrict visibility then please let me know.
https://developer.trustedfirmware.org/w/collaboration/community_development…
Thanks,
Abhishek
Attendees :
- Abhishek Pandit, Arm
- Andrej Butok, NXP
- Anton Komlev, Arm
- Dan Handley, Arm
- David Brown, Linaro
- Dave Cocca, Renesas
- Eric Finco, ST
- Gyorgy Szing, Arm
- Joakim Bech, Linaro
- Julius Werner, Google
- Kangkang Shen, Futurewei
- Kevin Oerton, NXM
- Michael Thomas, Renesas
- Shebu Varghese Kuriakose, Arm
- Lionel Debieve, ST
(Thanks Joakim for taking the notes!)
Trusted Services & PSA
- Shebu presented Trusted Services roadmap (to be circulated).
- Crypto, Attestation and secure storage is the three first main API's.
- TF-M available on several platforms.
- General ask to extend PSA to Cortex-A devices, Edge devices etc. More
complicated environment, since many different stacks etc. This was the reason
why Trusted Services was born.
- Initial code base etc for Trusted Services can be found at TF.org.
- T.S. is a framework to develop security related services.
- Communication can be FF-A or OpenAMP.
- Started to implement same services on Cortex-A as we've done for the TF-M.
- Michael: Is this expected to reach TF-M?
Shebu: No, it's only for TF-A.
- Andrej: Will interface be the same as in TF-M?
Shebu: Yes
- FF-A is the protocol between all exception levels (pre-Armv8.4 devices where
there are no S-EL2). Right now development takes place on Arm models (FVP).
- For Armv8.4 we also have Secure EL-2 (Hafnium). I.e., the secure partition
manager (SPM) is in S-EL2.
- Kevin: TA's access? pre8.4 only to non-secure side?
Shebu: Traditional TA's will co-exist with SP's (via a shim layer).
- TS: 2021/Q2: Attest SP, Protected Storage SP, FF-A direct messaging, FIP based
booting.
- TS: 2021/Q3: Attest SP continues, StMM Updates, PSA Functional API testing,
32bit support SEL0/SP, Storage backend intergration.
- TS: 2021/Q4: 32-bit support SEL0/SP continues, Platform Security Firmware
Update for A-profile, Meta-arm yocto support.
- OP-TEE Q2,3,4: Co-developed (pending changes can be found in a TF.org branch).
- OP-TEE users will get all changes from the official upstream project, and TS
services from TF.org.
- Kangkang: Multicore, how to switch to secure side.
Gyorgy: Same as OP-TEE.
JB: Everything on secure side runs on a single core. I.e., a TA cannot use two
or more cores.
Kangkang: On x86, it's possible to switch so you utilize all cores.
Patch management - security issues - LTS
- Dave: Generally positive feedback.
- Dave: Dan wanted to avoid the semantic versioning? What's the background for
the concern? We'd like to use the Major, Minor, Fix
Anton: TF-M uses semver, but it's tweaked for it's own purposes.
David B: Do we have any reason not to compel with the standard?
Anton: No hotfix?
Michael: Yes it's there, they call it patch.
https://semver.org/
Anton: Wanted to use the "Patch" for security fixes only.
Abhishek: On high-level it matches, but not backwards-compatible for "patch".
Hence strictly not Semantic Versioning.
- Dave: We should reference the link in the release cadence and process.
- Dave: Dan, LTS policy, use the lifetime of the branch. Anton proposed a 8
month coverage (two releases back basically). TF-M have stayed away from the
LTS terminology.
Abhishek: Should we patch all old release or only the last one? The last is
properly tested, but the one prior to that will not have the same amount of
testing.
Dave: Customers must be comfortable with understanding for how long the LTS
will be there and will be patched. Need to figure out how far back we will
test old release when doing security fixes.
Shebu: Not trivial from a resourcing point of view. Three years should be more
than enough, more than that will probably not make sense, since things will
likely have been re-designed.
Michael: TF-M is in an early state, maybe pre-mature to define LTS. But once
customer started to deploy it, we must assure that there are patches/stable
builds maintained and security holes and bugs fixed.
Shebu: Everyone in the board supports the LTS, the question is to frame it
(time).
Dave: For now leave LTS out and mention the previous version as starting
point.
Abhishek: Sounds OK. Companies on older version will to thorough testing since
they have products out already.
Dave: Major, minor?
Abhishek: Yes, only use Major and Minor.
- Dave: testing, on the minor release that gets the hot-fix, what is the amount
of testing? Need clarification.
Anton: Normal CI testing is overnight, sanity tests, performance etc. All done
on FVP. For release test, we ask "everyone" to test on their boards and we
give the 2 week window for the testing.
Dave: Once we have OpenCI in place, things could improve for hot-fix testing?
Anton: Yes, that's our optimistic view on it.
Abhishek: Automatic successful testing is not the problem. It's the failing
that is the challenge. Board/device owner will have to help with
investigations.
Michael: Also important to add new test, testing the security fix. Will the
test suite also be updated for old versions.
Anton: If we provide a fix, do we want to keep the branch forever?
Dave: How to get it to Phabricator?
Abhishek: You can add it there yourself. Will help you with permissions etc.
Feedback from TSC reps
- Abhishek: Looking for more feedback for the next meeting.
- Joakim: Reminder that the email tsc@... is going to a public list seen by
anyone https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/pipermail/tsc/.
Abhishek: Will see if I'll create an internal Phabricator page.
There is the one pending from the previous meeting:
* [Tentative] Trusted Services roadmap presentation. I am checking availability within Arm as this is short notice.
Regards,
Eric Finco
[Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description: logo_big5]
Eric FINCO | Tel: +33 (0)2 4402 7154
MDG | Technical Specialist
ST Restricted
From: TSC <tsc-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> On Behalf Of Abhishek Pandit via TSC
Sent: lundi 17 mai 2021 13:00
To: tsc(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Subject: [TF-TSC] TSC Agenda 20 May 2021
Hi All,
Any agenda items for this week's meeting?
Thanks,
Abhishek
Hi,
Please find the minutes/actions from last Thursday's TrustedFirmware TSC.
Best regards
Don - Sent on behalf to the Trustedfirmware TSC Chairs
Attendees
Dave Cocca, Joakim Bech, Anton Komlev <Anton.Komlev(a)arm.com>, Eric
Finco, Julius
Werner
Kevin Townsend, David Brown, Kangkang Shen, Abhishek Pandit
Lionel Debieve, Andrej Butok, Dan Handley, Andrej Butok, Don Harbin
Actions:
-
Dave Cocca develop an initial proposal on how to handle Security Patches
midstream. Send to Joakim and Dan Handley for review, then to the TSC.
-
Abhishek Pandit - ask PSA team how they handle security patches and
provide feedback to TSC.
Minutes:
-
AP: Reminder - TS presentation next month
-
JB: Timeline/Roadmaps for TS can be asked about next month
-
DC: Security Patches - a policy in place for how patches rolled out,
versions, how many versions to backport, etc. In particular, coming out
with a new MCUrelease, want to align TF-M and mBedTLS
-
AP: Some discussions happening. TF-M specific?
-
DC: mBedTLS and TF-M
-
AP: TF-M, Anton is Tech Lead.
-
DanH: mbedTLS - relatively mature product going well and widely used.
A history of LTS branches, etc. So there is a policy in place. All
security and non-security bugs support is on the LTS branches. When
released, fixes are part of the released version. All fixes
updated at the
same time. TF-M policy is relatively new, and it needs discussion on how
to move this forward with consideration of costs.
-
DC: Yes cost is a factor, and members doing it as well for their own
s/w. The solution needs to be practical
-
DanH: Reasonable to come up w/ policy related to security fixes. For
example, have no release without all security fixes in place and
validated.
-
AP: Current releases are on a 3-4 month cadence, assuming that’s OK
-
AK: TF-M has only a couple of incidents. Have hotfixes. The main
issues is validation and test. Can’t expect an ad-hoc release. Should
release on tested platforms. Can define the process and verification
window.
-
AP: Talking about a next release, not LTS
-
AK: Correct
-
DanH: We need to understand what all members want to see
-
DC: With TF-M v1.2, we could put out a 1.2.1 for a Security
Vulnerability with limited testing and validation of the patches.
Customers must then decide if they want to integrate. Could be a 1.2.z,
i.e. a revision versus version. Not officially tested
standalone, but the
patch would be available.
-
AP: The question is if 1.1 is there, then what?
-
DC: In how we do it, the 1.0 needs maintained, if prior, then have to
go back further. Then if someone wants it fixed, must go to the
next minor
release
-
DanH: So most recent release as a starting point?
-
DC: yes
-
AP: If TF-M makes a 1.2.1 release, for example, and it’s not being
validated, what is the value?
-
DC: from TF.org standpoint, patch release with limited testing.
-
AK: Patch is available
-
DanH: Is there a concern on backporting?
-
DB: Conflict issue is more obvious. But testing is more important
-
DonH: Why not run the full Open CI test suite?
-
DB: That’s run on the branch, but not for separate vendor releases
-
AP: So full release gets tested, then it’s up to vendors to pull into
their own builds/boards.
-
DanH: So running Open CI is enough?
-
DC: Yes, that should be enough. Vendors can also do extra testing
but can inform that it also ran on Open CI. As long as transparent.
-
AP: Lack of experience on TF-M users and lack of definition of major
and minor releases are clear.
-
AK: Have a versioning schema.
-
JB: Example - https://semver.org/
-
KKS: Older security patches often have a short time, so only as a
reference is the level of commitment that can be made.
-
DC: Agree wouldn’t release major versions until fully tested, but for
ones not fully tested, could do the ad-hoc release.
-
AP: In most cases, security patches are a reference.
-
DanH: What Dave asked for doesn’t seem that costly.
-
AK: The main difference is the amount of testing.
-
AP: That proposal can go out.
-
ACTION: ^^^ DC come up with the initial draft. Send to Joakim, Dan.
-
DanH: Do these impact release schedules?
-
JB: No.
-
DC: If someone wants PSA level 2 certification, would they be able to
use the current version (1.2 for example) with identified
security patches?
-
DanH: Not sure how this is handled. Need to ask PSA Team
-
ACTION ^^^ AP
-
Joakim: OP TEE content. Like to redirect OPTEE.org
-
JB: Docs in multiple places and attempting to pull this together like
the OP TEE readthedocs.
-
JB: Where do we put Security Advisories.
-
DanH: Why not in all documentation?
-
DanH: Github has a way to list as well
-
DB: Github solution is being used elsewhere - then code users
automatically see the advisories.
-
DB: Must have admin rights on the advisory repo. Can add people to
do other tasks.
-
JB: Can’t see a way to remove ones
-
DB: Shared example for Zephyr. Data matches CVEs well.
-
JB: The link to PR is nice.
-
DB: No API yet but can get an alert. Must web scrape to get it.
-
DanH: Avoiding Phabricator seems good
-
JB: Agreed
-
DanH: Github seems a good idea
-
JB: Will plan to redirect.
-
ArmV9
-
DanH: Armv9 announced, presented at a high level. CCA and realm mgt
extensions included. The expectation is to have more details coming over
the following months. May see some TF-A EL3 code support
patches but won’t
change how things work. Later, some changes could be more invasive.
-
JB: Memory Tagging extension has been around, why mentioned here?
-
DanH: Not sure, a stepping stone to Morello? Not sure if anything
additional in V9.
-
AP: Note this is just the first announcement. Must wait on some
details.
-
DanH: Expect more technical presentations in the upcoming months
Following on the agenda for tomorrow
* TF-M security vulnerability and patch release policy, providing fixes for security issues for past releases. [Dave Cocca]
* optee.org transition to trustedfimrware.org. [Joakim Bech]
* [Tentative] Trusted Services roadmap presentation. I am checking availability within Arm as this is short notice.
Thanks,
Abhishek
From: TSC <tsc-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> On Behalf Of Abhishek Pandit via TSC
Sent: 13 April 2021 12:21
To: tsc(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Subject: [TF-TSC] TSC Agenda 15 Apr 2021
Hi All,
Any agenda items for this week's meeting?
Thanks,
Abhishek
Hi,
On Tue, 13 Apr 2021 at 13:29, Joakim Bech via TSC <
tsc(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Timely, I had this written in another email :-)
>
> optee.org (on purpose) doesn't contain much information of value. We
> removed duplicated and stale information quite some time ago and now the
> only thing that is really left of value there is the security advisories.
> So, I want to redirect optee.org to trustedfirmware.org/projects/op-tee.
>
> I don't want to get rid of optee.org (and op-tee.org), since there is
> branding value in those. I simply want to remove our current page and
> redirect to TrustedFirmware.org. Redirection is easy, however, we need to
> figure out where to host the security advisories. We could either store
> them directly accessible under a trustedfirmware.org as a sub-page or we
> can put them somewhere under our existing security pages at Phabricator. So
> as a topic for tomorrow, I'd like to hear whether you're against me
> redirecting this and have a discussion about what to do with security
> advisories. Right now OP-TEE and other TF-projects are spread out on
> various sites.
>
> Then with the recent Armv9 announcement, I wonder if we as a group already
> now need to start thinking about what we need to do with the project under
> TF? I would be surprised if we don't have to do anything as a collective
> group.
>
In addition to that, we from Linaro are also interested in the roadmap and
associated timelines for the Trusted Services project. If someone (from Arm
I suppose) has information about that ready to be shared, then that's a
third thing that could be covered on Thursday.
Regards,
Joakim
>
> Regards,
> Joakim
>
>
> On Tue, 13 Apr 2021 at 13:20, Abhishek Pandit via TSC <
> tsc(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> wrote:
>
>> Hi All,
>>
>>
>>
>> Any agenda items for this week’s meeting?
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Abhishek
>> --
>> TSC mailing list
>> TSC(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
>> https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/tsc
>>
> --
> TSC mailing list
> TSC(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
> https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/tsc
>
Hi,
Timely, I had this written in another email :-)
optee.org (on purpose) doesn't contain much information of value. We
removed duplicated and stale information quite some time ago and now the
only thing that is really left of value there is the security advisories.
So, I want to redirect optee.org to trustedfirmware.org/projects/op-tee.
I don't want to get rid of optee.org (and op-tee.org), since there is
branding value in those. I simply want to remove our current page and
redirect to TrustedFirmware.org. Redirection is easy, however, we need to
figure out where to host the security advisories. We could either store
them directly accessible under a trustedfirmware.org as a sub-page or we
can put them somewhere under our existing security pages at Phabricator. So
as a topic for tomorrow, I'd like to hear whether you're against me
redirecting this and have a discussion about what to do with security
advisories. Right now OP-TEE and other TF-projects are spread out on
various sites.
Then with the recent Armv9 announcement, I wonder if we as a group already
now need to start thinking about what we need to do with the project under
TF? I would be surprised if we don't have to do anything as a collective
group.
Regards,
Joakim
On Tue, 13 Apr 2021 at 13:20, Abhishek Pandit via TSC <
tsc(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> wrote:
> Hi All,
>
>
>
> Any agenda items for this week’s meeting?
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Abhishek
> --
> TSC mailing list
> TSC(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
> https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/tsc
>
Hi TF Board/TSC
You may have seen the below invite on the TF-A or OP-TEE lists but I'm just forwarding directly in case you missed this. If you have an interest then please contact François-Frédéric directly.
Regards
Dan.
From: François Ozog <francois.ozog(a)linaro.org<mailto:francois.ozog@linaro.org>>
Sent: Thursday, April 8, 2021 12:59 PM
To: TSC <tsc(a)linaro.org<mailto:tsc@linaro.org>>
Subject: Invitation to OP-TEE functional safety workshop
Hi,
Linaro is conducting an opportunity assessment to make OP TEE (open platform trusted execution environment) ready for functional safety sensitive environments.
The scope of this analysis also covers Trusted Firmware and Hafnium even though we will not try to produce a plan for their own safety readiness.
We’re organizing a 2 hours workshop on April 15th 9am CET to present the state of the research, discuss the key use cases, and brainstorm on possible requirements for a Long Term Support program.
The first use case is to use the TEE to boot a safety certified type-1 hypervisor. We are also considering other use cases - for example, a safety payload could be loaded as a Secure Partition on top of Hafnium with OP-TEE or Zephyr used as a device backends.
Agenda (to be refined)
* Vision
* Use cases discussion
* What is the right scope?
State of the research <https://docs.google.com/presentation/u/0/d/1jWqu39gCF-5XzbFkodXsiVNJJLUN88B…>
* “Who does what” discussion (LTS, archiving...)
* Safety personnel (Linaro and contractors) discussion
* Other considerations from participants?
* Community organizations and funding?
* Closing and next steps
(preliminary content can be found in the attached document, the goal will not be to go though all slides but to use them to guide the discussion)
We have contacted key partners in the Arm ecosystem as well as Tier 1 and car makers and we would like to invite you to join our workshop: we would highly appreciate your contribution. If you are interested or if you would recommend anyone from your team, we will be pleased to send a calendar invite with the bridge details.
Looking forward to hearing from you soon
François-Frédéric
--
[https://drive.google.com/a/linaro.org/uc?id=0BxTAygkus3RgQVhuNHMwUi1mYWc&ex…]
François-Frédéric Ozog | Director Linaro Edge & Fog Computing Group
T: +33.67221.6485
francois.ozog(a)linaro.org<mailto:francois.ozog@linaro.org> | Skype: ffozog
I’d also recommend:
· LVC21-303: Secure Partition Manager evolution (Armv8.4 Secure EL2) – on the Hafnium new developments
* LVC21-207: Standard Firmware Updates on Arm
* LVC21-315: Measured Boot Support in Trusted Firmware A class (TF-A) project
Lots of firmware related talks this time!!
Matteo
From: TSC <tsc-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> On Behalf Of Don Harbin via TSC
Sent: 20 March 2021 00:42
To: board(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org; tsc(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Subject: [TF-TSC] Linaro Virtual Connect next week
Hi All,
I've assumed you are all aware, but just in case, I wanted to invite each of you to Linaro Virtual Connect next week. Of particular interest will be the following sessions:
* Trusted Firmware Project Update presented by Matteo & Shebu
* Introducing the Trusted Services Project by Julian Hall
* Trust Ain't Easy: Challenges of TEE Security by Cristofaro Mune & Niek Timmers
* ASLR in OP-TEE by Jens Wilander
* Firmware Configuration Framework and Chain of Trust in TF-A by Madhukar Pappireddy & Manish Badarkhe
* Firmware update service in TF-M by Sherry Zhang
* Firmware Framework - M 1.1 feature update in TF-M by Ken Liu
* OP-TEE as a Secure Partition running on SPM using ARMv8.4-A SEL2 feature by Arunachalam Ganapathy & Jens Wiklander
· PSA-FF-A compliant Secure User Mode partition support for Arm platforms by Sayanta Pattanayak & Aditya Angadi
· Secure Partition Management in OP-TEE (pre 8.4 Cortex-A devices)
* by Jelle Sels
* VIrtualization for OP-TEE by Volodymyr Babchuk
There's other sessions you may find useful as well so take a look at the schedule here<https://connect.linaro.org/schedule/>.
Virtual Connect additional notes:
* Register here<https://connect.linaro.org/>. It's free, so invite your co-workers to join as well! :)
* The virtual sessions occur across various time-zones, but all sessions will be recorded and published shortly after the event for you to be able to watch later.
Best regards,
Don
*
Hi All,
I've assumed you are all aware, but just in case, I wanted to invite each
of you to Linaro Virtual Connect next week. Of particular interest will be
the following sessions:
- *Trusted Firmware Project Update* presented by Matteo & Shebu
- *Introducing the Trusted Services Project* by Julian Hall
- *Trust Ain't Easy: Challenges of TEE Security* by Cristofaro Mune &
Niek Timmers
- *ASLR in OP-TEE * by Jens Wilander
- *Firmware Configuration Framework and Chain of Trust in TF-A* by
Madhukar Pappireddy & Manish Badarkhe
- *Firmware update service in TF-M* by Sherry Zhang
- *Firmware Framework - M 1.1 feature update in TF-M* by Ken Liu
- *OP-TEE as a Secure Partition running on SPM using ARMv8.4-A SEL2
feature* by Arunachalam Ganapathy & Jens Wiklander
- *PSA-FF-A compliant Secure User Mode partition support for Arm
platforms* by Sayanta Pattanayak & Aditya Angadi
- *Secure Partition Management in OP-TEE (pre 8.4 Cortex-A devices)*
- by Jelle Sels
- *VIrtualization for OP-TEE *by Volodymyr Babchuk
There's other sessions you may find useful as well so take a look at
the *schedule
here <https://connect.linaro.org/schedule/>*.
Virtual Connect additional notes:
- *Register here <https://connect.linaro.org/>*. It's free, so invite
your co-workers to join as well! :)
- The virtual sessions occur across various time-zones, but all sessions
will be recorded and published shortly after the event for you to be able
to watch later.
Best regards,
Don
-
Hi all
As you will have seen from the cancelled meeting invite, there were no agenda items to discuss this month.
Regards
Dan.
From: TSC <tsc-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> On Behalf Of Dan Handley via TSC
Sent: 15 March 2021 12:20
To: tsc(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Subject: [TF-TSC] TSC agenda 18th March 2021
Hi all
Please let us know if you have any agenda items for this Thursday's TSC meeting?
Regards
Dan.
Hi
Attached is my presentation on FF-A and PSA RoT enablement in OP-TEE.
Let me know any further questions on the topic.
Cheers,
Miklos
From: TSC <tsc-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> On Behalf Of Don Harbin via TSC
Sent: 01 March 2021 20:54
To: tsc(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Subject: [TF-TSC] TrustedFirmware Feb 18 TSC Meeting Minutes
Hi All,
Please find the minutes from the last TSC below.
Attachments to be sent separately.
Best regards,
Don Harbin - sent on behalf of the TSC chair
Attendees: Dave Cocca, Lionel Debieve, Eric Finco, Kangkan Shen, Miklos Balint, David Brown, Kevin Townsend, Abhishek Pandit, Joakim Bech, Don Harbin
Minutes:
* Dan: Groups.io update. David B learned that Zephyr used it, but a different migration source (Google groups). More straightforward than ours. So would expect a rough transition. Could make it work if we started over without promising a seamless migration.
* David B: Adding user names should be straightforward.
* Dan: Yes. Major concerns are live migration to TrustedFirwmare.org domain and archive migration. Three ways to proceed: 1) Manage disruption as we go and hope for the best, 2) Go for a clean setup, 3) Drop for now
* A wider tooling issue for TF.org. Github/Gerrit and things like Slack are under consideration.
* AP: Not sure how much more we should invest on this. If we had a communication channel like Slack, there would be less need for mailing lists.
* DB: Groups.io may also remove ongoing headache from managing mailman.
* Dan/Joakim: Mailman not much of a burden these days.
* DB: Spam rules can cause issues. List clients can often look like spam. Email providers may then start to reject folks on the list. Groups.io would be motivated to fix such things.
* AP: Groups.io not even responding to support queries.
* Dan H: Linaro IT is resistant.If we can’t get them onside then who will push this through?
* Linaro IT is currently managing mailman OK, so should we just leave it?
* JB: Proceed or not?
* DB: Perhaps pursue Slack as chat platform? It’s free if you don’t want history archived. Can be expensive if you need other features as there’s a per-user cost.
* Is Mailman a big issue?
* At this point, not so much.
* AP: Perhaps table this for now and if we decide to move from Phabricator handle this at this time.
* AP: With no volunteers to champion, close this and re-open if something changes.
* Lionel: FF-A coming into OP TEE and PSA certs.
* Miklos: Presented attached FF-A enablement slides
* Eric: How backward compatible are the proposed changes?
* Miklos: They can be made backwards compatible if configured accordingly. Existing services can continue to be supported with GP APIs and new services can use FF-A.
* Joakim: Is FF-A expected to replace GP APIs?
* Miklos: GP is widely used. Both are likely to co-exist. On a particular segment/configuration, one may be more relevant than the other.
<end>
Hi All,
Please find the minutes from the last TSC below.
Attachments to be sent separately.
Best regards,
Don Harbin - sent on behalf of the TSC chair
*Attendees*: Dave Cocca, Lionel Debieve, Eric Finco, Kangkan Shen, Miklos
Balint, David Brown, Kevin Townsend, Abhishek Pandit, Joakim Bech, Don
Harbin
*Minutes*:
-
Dan: Groups.io update. David B learned that Zephyr used it, but a
different migration source (Google groups). More straightforward than
ours. So would expect a rough transition. Could make it work if we started
over without promising a seamless migration.
-
David B: Adding user names should be straightforward.
-
Dan: Yes. Major concerns are live migration to TrustedFirwmare.org
domain and archive migration. Three ways to proceed: 1) Manage
disruption
as we go and hope for the best, 2) Go for a clean setup, 3) Drop for now
-
A wider tooling issue for TF.org. Github/Gerrit and things like
Slack are under consideration.
-
AP: Not sure how much more we should invest on this. If we had a
communication channel like Slack, there would be less need for mailing
lists.
-
DB: Groups.io may also remove ongoing headache from managing mailman.
-
Dan/Joakim: Mailman not much of a burden these days.
-
DB: Spam rules can cause issues. List clients can often look like
spam. Email providers may then start to reject folks on the list.
Groups.io would be motivated to fix such things.
-
AP: Groups.io not even responding to support queries.
-
Dan H: Linaro IT is resistant.If we can’t get them onside then who
will push this through?
-
Linaro IT is currently managing mailman OK, so should we just leave
it?
-
JB: Proceed or not?
-
DB: Perhaps pursue Slack as chat platform? It’s free if you don’t
want history archived. Can be expensive if you need other features as
there’s a per-user cost.
-
Is Mailman a big issue?
-
At this point, not so much.
-
AP: Perhaps table this for now and if we decide to move from
Phabricator handle this at this time.
-
AP: With no volunteers to champion, close this and re-open if
something changes.
-
Lionel: FF-A coming into OP TEE and PSA certs.
-
Miklos: Presented attached FF-A enablement slides
-
Eric: How backward compatible are the proposed changes?
-
Miklos: They can be made backwards compatible if configured
accordingly. Existing services can continue to be supported with GP APIs
and new services can use FF-A.
-
Joakim: Is FF-A expected to replace GP APIs?
-
Miklos: GP is widely used. Both are likely to co-exist. On a
particular segment/configuration, one may be more relevant than the other.
<end>
+Serban who can answer this much better than me.
On Wed, Feb 17, 2021 at 1:53 AM Joakim Bech via TSC
<tsc(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Abhishek, Julius, TF-reps,
>
> I'd like to better understand what the plan is with Hafnium. What are Google, Arm and TF as a group intending to do with it? I believe it was and still is (?) going to be the reference implementation in S-EL2. But, maybe I'm wrong. But I think I've heard that Google changed the focus wrt secure side. I believe Will Deacon touches this in this talk [1] (although KVM related). As said I could be wrong, but if someone could give an update and clarity to this, it'd be great.
>
> [1] https://youtu.be/wY-u6n75iXc?t=894
>
> Regards,
> Joakim
>
>
> On Tue, 16 Feb 2021 at 00:44, Abhishek Pandit via TSC <tsc(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> wrote:
>>
>> Hi All,
>>
>>
>>
>> Any agenda items for this week’s meeting?
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Abhishek
>>
>> --
>> TSC mailing list
>> TSC(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
>> https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/tsc
>
> --
> TSC mailing list
> TSC(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
> https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/tsc
Hi Abhishek, Julius, TF-reps,
I'd like to better understand what the plan is with Hafnium. What are
Google, Arm and TF as a group intending to do with it? I believe it was and
still is (?) going to be the reference implementation in S-EL2. But, maybe
I'm wrong. But I think I've heard that Google changed the focus wrt secure
side. I believe Will Deacon touches this in this talk [1] (although KVM
related). As said I could be wrong, but if someone could give an update and
clarity to this, it'd be great.
[1] https://youtu.be/wY-u6n75iXc?t=894
Regards,
Joakim
On Tue, 16 Feb 2021 at 00:44, Abhishek Pandit via TSC <
tsc(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> wrote:
> Hi All,
>
>
>
> Any agenda items for this week’s meeting?
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Abhishek
> --
> TSC mailing list
> TSC(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
> https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/tsc
>
Hi Don, Kangkang, TSC-reps,
On Tue, 26 Jan 2021 at 00:27, Don Harbin via TSC <
tsc(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> wrote:
> Hi,
> Please see minutes from last week's TSC below.
> Best regards,
> Don
>
> - Sent on behalf of TSC Chair
>
> *Actions*:
>
> -
>
>
> -
>
> -
>
> ACTION: Joakim to follow up with Kangkang for the use of multiple
> cores on the Secure World side.
>
> I've talked to some people internally regarding this and in addition to
that I've just sent a follow-up email to Kangkang with some clarifications
and some suggestions for a continued discussion. I think we can close this
action (at least for now). We'll bring this up for discussion at TF TSC
later on if/when we have more to discuss.
Regards,
Joakim
Hi,
Please see minutes from last week's TSC below.
Best regards,
Don
- Sent on behalf of TSC Chair
*Attendees*: Don, Dan H, Abhishek, Kevin Oerton, David Brown, Julius
Werner, Andrej Butok, Joakim Bech, KangKang Shen, Dave Cocca, Kevin
Townsend, Michael Thomas
*Actions*:
-
ACTION: DavidB send a note to Brett and ask for details on Groups.io
options. Ask about options
-
-
ACTION: Don to add DavidB to the Groups.io tickets (IT, and Tasks). Done
- ACTION: Abhishek Pandit <abhishek.pandit(a)arm.com> to reach out
Kangkang for a side discussion on exclusive language.
-
ACTION: Joakim to follow up with Kangkang for the use of multiple cores
on the Secure World side.
*Minutes*:
-
AP: Introduce Kevin Oerton. Focus PSA Certs on ST and moving to
Cortex-A. A self-defending security platform. Comes with “Cyber warranty”
model. Incorporated in US, working out of Toronto
-
Brief intros from the rest of the team
-
Kevin Townsend - Linaro LITE
-
Dan H: Arm, TSC rep. TF-A history but interested in lots more.
-
KK: Futurewei. Chief F/W architect at Huawei before splitting out
into Futurewei.
-
David Brown: Linaro - LITE. On Security Working Group but on Linaro
LITE. MCUBoot Maintainer, Security Arch. for Zephyr
-
Dave C: Renesas: Interested in TF-M and M bed TLS to support Micro
Controllers
-
Andrej B: NXP Czech republic. TSA, TF-M, and more. Support 4
platforms w/ SDK with more to come. Still needs to be upstreamed with
limited resources. Plan to bring an intern on board to accelerate
upstreaming.
-
AP: Is Zephyr team working w/ TF-M?
-
AB: No contributions at this time. Not enough resources to support
upstream TF-M, hoping to change that
-
JoakimB: Sweden, Linaro. Started the Security Working Group. Now
transitioned. An OP TEE Maintainer, but no longer reviewing all
patches.
Now focusing on DT, Boot Architecture, Provisioning, and Remote attention
to name a few. Also handles Security Issues. Includes OP-TEE and more.
-
JuliusW: Google on ChromeOS. Using TF-A for 5 years now. Other Google
teams interested in Hafnium
-
MichaelT: Renesas working for Dave Cocca. Focused on Renesas RA
security solutions.
-
Abhishek: Arm, Cambridge. At Arm for 5 years, lead TF-M from the
start. Manage all firmware teams including TF-A, TF-M, and
more. Focus on
all
-
Groups.io status
-
DanH: Started in May that Groups.io started as a good replacement for
Mailman. Approved by the board to move forward. Included
Domain support.
Ended up not getting a non-profit discount. Since November, Don, Linaro
IT, and I have been investigating. Used a Linaro Service Desk ticket.
-
DanH: Linaro IT (Philip) helped a lot with limitations. Migration
not straight forward and getting very limited support
-
DanH: Archive migration may be a blocker. Also how to do the
switchover with blackout periods but not getting support here.
Potentially
could do archive migration later but not sure if this is possible or what
the behavior is when replying to a mail not in groups.io.
-
DavidB: On last point, got this working for Zephyr. Wasn’t very
friendly. Was all settings adjustments that can be overridden per user.
-
DanH: Private groups can’t become public later. Limited support
response but it may be because we are only evaluating (not paid any
money). Linaro IT is not supportive of this so making the transition
harder.
-
DavidB: Has a bulk suggest option where you can email people to ask
them to sign up.
-
Don: How far was zephyr in when the transition happened? How many
lists?
-
DavidB: Came in after and used David as Admin to go fix issues.
-
DavidB: Was this discussed with Zephyr to see how they transitioned.
-
ACTION: DavidB send a note to Brett and ask for details. Ask about
options
-
Joakim: Maintain OP TEE list. Have added spam filters as we have
moved along, but now going pretty well.
-
DavidB: Zephyr uses Groups.io for mailing lists and group calendars.
A calendar is available that works ok. There is a bug on
Daylight Savings
so must use UTC. ~1000 people on the main mailing lists. Mostly was
migrated.
-
Abhishek: Want to transfer Archives, and Groups.io has to do that.
-
DavidB: Do we get that support if enterprise?
-
ACTION: Don to add DavidB to the tickets (IT, and Tasks).
-
Joakim: Have a long list of senders filters; can we re-use this for
other lists? Any automation on that?
-
Abhishek: Inclusive Language / Code of Conduct
-
Abhishek: Shared both Community Guideline and Code of Conduct
-
Abhishek: Text from what was agreed in the email
-
DaveC: Don’t see issues. Like the retrospective comments that don’t
need to go back and correct existing content but only for new comments.
-
Abhishek to send out a note with Deadline.
-
KK: Like Coding Standard but no in Code of Conduct. A technical
requirement when coding. But not a code of conduct
-
Abhishek: That’s in a different location. Started with Eclipse as an
example for Code of Conduct. Lots of adopters using this -
https://www.contributor-covenant.org/
-
There was consensus from many in the meeting
-
KK: Inclusive Language is a technical requirement.
-
ACTION: Abhishek Pandit <abhishek.pandit(a)arm.com> to reach out
Kangkang for a side discussion.
-
Abhishek: Should this go to vote or just do this?
-
Julius: who enforces is often changed?
-
Julius: Just have it so that TSC members make the decisions.
-
Who decides how to handle it?
-
Board or TSC.
-
Needs to come up to Board.
-
Breaches won’t decide when they happen
-
Conclusions: Leave as is and sending to
enquiries(a)trustedfirmware.org is good for now.
-
No objections. No vote to occur on this.
-
KK: Can we load multi-core in Trusted Firmware? TF-A
-
DavidB: Do that already? Cypress?
-
DanH/Joakim: TF-A has always been multi-core
-
Runtime code is multi-core. PSCI Spec describes this.
-
DanH: It seems that KK is actually talking about the secure world
spawning additional threads on other cores when servicing normal world
requests. This may require discussion with the Firmware Framework-A spec
people at Arm so that the normal world can account for this work..
-
ACTION: Joakim to follow up with KK on multiple cores on the Secure
World side.
Hi all
Attached are 3 slides I prepared on the groups.io topic.
Regards
Dan.
From: TSC <tsc-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> On Behalf Of Abhishek Pandit via TSC
Sent: 20 January 2021 19:41
To: tsc(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
Subject: Re: [TF-TSC] TSC Agenda 21 Jan 2021
Updated agenda:
* Review community guideline draft - https://developer.trustedfirmware.org/w/collaboration/community_guidelines/
* groups.io update from Dan Handley
Thanks,
Abhishek
From: Abhishek Pandit
Sent: 18 January 2021 12:03
To: tsc(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org<mailto:tsc@lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Subject: TSC Agenda 21 Jan 2021
Hi All,
Any agenda items for this week's meeting? Can I please have responses by the end of Tuesday 19th?
Currently on the agenda:
* Review community guideline draft - https://developer.trustedfirmware.org/w/collaboration/community_guidelines/
Thanks,
Abhishek
Hi,
On Tue, 19 Jan 2021 at 23:11, Julius Werner via TSC <
tsc(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> wrote:
> Hi Abhishek,
>
> > Review community guideline draft -
> https://developer.trustedfirmware.org/w/collaboration/community_guidelines/
>
> Is the intention that we review this draft before the meeting so that
> we can discuss it there? Because all I can access is a stub page that
> links to two other pages (inclusive language and code of conduct),
> both of which I do not have permission to open. Please fix the
> permissions on those if they are ready for review.
>
Same here with the permission and I also wondered the same.
Regards,
Joakim
Hi Abhishek,
> Review community guideline draft - https://developer.trustedfirmware.org/w/collaboration/community_guidelines/
Is the intention that we review this draft before the meeting so that
we can discuss it there? Because all I can access is a stub page that
links to two other pages (inclusive language and code of conduct),
both of which I do not have permission to open. Please fix the
permissions on those if they are ready for review.
Thanks,
Julius
Cancelled. Please note that in cancelling today's meeting I
accidentally cancelled the series, so I had to also send out a new invite
to get those back in your calendar for the upcoming 3rd thursdays of each
month. Sorry about that.
Don
On Thu, 17 Dec 2020 at 05:16, Abhishek Pandit via TSC <
tsc(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org> wrote:
> Hi All,
>
>
>
> There is no agenda for the meeting so I suggest we cancel it.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Abhishek
>
>
>
> *From:* Abhishek Pandit
> *Sent:* 15 December 2020 17:34
> *To:* tsc(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
> *Subject:* TSC Agenda 17 Dec 2020
>
>
>
> Hi All,
>
>
>
> Any agenda items for this week’s meeting?
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Abhishek
> --
> TSC mailing list
> TSC(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org
> https://lists.trustedfirmware.org/mailman/listinfo/tsc
>
Dear TSC,
I sent the summary below to the board yesterday and Dan suggested it would
be good to share with the TSC as well.
Let me know if you have any questions. :)
Best regards,
Don
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Don Harbin <don.harbin(a)linaro.org>
Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2020 at 16:18
Subject: New Blog posts / website updates FYI
To: <board(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Hi all,
I wanted to make sure you all were aware of some new content on the website
and the Phabricator (wiki). Below are the items of note:
- TF-M 1.2 release blog here:
- https://www.trustedfirmware.org/blog/tfm-v1-2-blog/
- TF-A 2.4 release w/ Secure ELS here:
- https://www.trustedfirmware.org/blog/TF-A-and-Hafnium-v2.4-release/
- You will see the updated TF Member list on the website now including
our newest two members (NXM and OMP - Welcome!).
- https://www.trustedfirmware.org/
- I've had our public meeting calendar integrated into the top of the
meetings page.
- This calendar will improve over time as we get all TF projects
public meetings integrated in. It will also provide a quick way to get
up-to-date dial in info for the meetings (some members have had issues
getting the invites into their corporate email accounts)
- https://www.trustedfirmware.org/meetings/
- Finally, per the last Board meeting, I had an action to provide
Board access to the new Community Development project on Phabricator that
has been proposed. It took me a bit of time to get the content to a place
where it was ready to share; I think it's much closer now. Please take a
look
- Community Development Project Home:
https://developer.trustedfirmware.org/project/profile/24/
- Tasks currently tracking:
https://developer.trustedfirmware.org/maniphest/
- Wiki home page for this with content relevant to submitting and/or
getting involved in TF ecosystem tasks:
https://developer.trustedfirmware.org/w/collaboration/community_development/
NOTE: There were ~5 or so individuals subscribed to the TF Board maillist
that I couldn't map emails to github accounts needed to provide access. So
if you have problems accessing the above, just drop me a note with your
github credentials that you use to log into the phabricator/wiki and I can
add you.
Note also that I gave access to the members of the TSC as requested by Dan
H (again, only for those that I could find github credentials in
phabricator).
Please feel free to send me a note with any questions. We also have the
board meeting Dec 9th, so we can have related discussions at that time as
well (if time allows)
Best regards,
Don
Attendees:
Joakim Bech (Linaro)
Dan Handley (Arm)
Eric Finco (ST)
Abhishek Pandit (Arm)
David Brown (Linaro)
Ashutosh Singh (Arm)
Kevin Townsend (Linaro)
Andrej Butok (NXP)
Dave Cocca (Renesas)
KangKang Shen (FutureWei)
Julius Werner(Google)
Lionel Debieve (ST)
ACTION: AP to propose specific website updates to TSC that incorporates inclusive language text.
ACTION: All to review Joakim's security incident flow diagrams
ACTION: Dan to ask Don about opening up community project items in Phabricator
Minutes:
AP: Light agenda today. Just an update on previous approvals.
AP: Trusted Services project is approved by TSC. There are some pending Arm internal approvals that have nearly completed. Expect to push first patches in the coming week.
AP: Inclusive language proposal is approved by TSC.
AP: Propose to have code of conduct page on website. Could be based on another org's policy. Zephyr looks a good candidate.
AP: Also want to provide a short info about the organization structure on the main website
AP: Inclusive language draft can then be incorporated into those pages.
ACTION: AP to propose specific website updates to TSC that incorporates inclusive language text.
AP: Expectation then will be that project leads will add the text to their own project specific documentation (e.g. coding guidelines).
AP: AOB?
KKS: Was looking for public meeting link for tech forums. Couldn't find them.
AP: We can move the links somewhere more obvious if you want?
KKS: Actually the link in "News & Blogs" is good enough. Just need to get used to the new site.
https://www.trustedfirmware.org/meetings/
JB: We purchased GP test suite a while ago. Since about 3 weeks ago this is now integrated into OP-TEE CI system.
https://optee.readthedocs.io/en/latest/building/gits/optee_test.html#extend…
JB: Have been trying to supplement security incident process with diagrams. Have had early feedback from some (e.g. DH). Now would like to share with TSC for feedback.
https://people.linaro.org/~joakim.bech/tf/
JB: Think this is necessary as the text is quite complex.
https://developer.trustedfirmware.org/w/collaboration/security_center/repor…
DH: Agree. Really useful to show default flow in 1st diagram. Text is complicated due to lots of potential caveats. Each project could show their own specific flow if needed.
DH: Diagrams 2-3 are more linked to the process for security team members so could be added there
https://developer.trustedfirmware.org/w/collaboration/security_center/setup…
AP: Could also write a blog that uses these diagrams and explains the caveats in more detail.
DH/JB: Might need to look at colour scheme before integrating to website
ACTION: All to review Joakim's security incident flow diagrams
AP: 2 other in-progress items: Migration to groups.io and prototyping GitHub/Gerrit integration. Was hoping for update from Don on that.
DH: This and other board/TSC items are captured in Phabricator but visibility is limited at present. We should get those opened up, at least for all board/TSC members
ACTION: Dan to ask Don about opening up community project items in Phabricator
Hi All,
Any agenda items for this week's meeting?
Following are on my list currently
* Inclusive Language guidelines
* Trusted Services project
Thanks
Abhishek
Hi all,
Please find the mInutes from the October 15 TrusteFirmware TSC below.
Best regards,
Don Harbin
TrustedFirmware Community Manager
don.harbin(a)linaro.org
Trusted Firmware TSC 15 October - MinutesAttendees
*Abhishek (Arm)Julian Hall (Arm)Gyorgi Szing (Arm)Dan Handley (Arm)KangKang
(FutureWei)Julius Werner (Google)Joakim Bech (Linaro)David Brown
(Linaro)Don Harbin (Linaro)Andrew Butok (NXP)Dave Cocca (Renesas)Michael
Thomas(Renesas)*Actions:
*Abhishek: Send inclusive language email for voteAbhishek: Check to see if
can share Trusted Service Project use casesAbhishek: Gather vote on Trusted
Services Project request through emailDanH: Talk to Matteo / Shebu about
requirements for continued support of s/w stacks on new h/w (in particular
the 8.4 and beyond). Develop a migration plan.*Minutes:
Trusted Services Project request
-
TSC needs to approve. No budgetary impacts
-
JH: Shared overview slides of Trusted Services Project
-
JH: Ready to re-publish the work. A build system is in place. Tests in
place.
-
Need a public repo
-
Need tf.org front page update
-
Need Mail list
-
CI is a TBD
-
DanH: Plan to go to public CI from the start?
-
Gyorgy - an internal CI first would be easier.
-
DanH: Need to be aware of what upstream CI will require ahead of time
-
DC: How are CI requirements related to other ongoing projects
-
Gyorgy - currently no implementation, would need to do that and implement
-
DC: What about ongoing CI?
-
DanH: Should eventually migrate to TF CI
-
AB: Why not develop as part of TF-A Project?
-
Abhishek: Ideally would migrate TF-A services into this at some point.
-
JH: A stand-alone w/ dependencies makes sense
-
DanH: Within Arm, want to integrate the components in multiple
configurations.
-
Abhishek: Would help if clarify TF-A vs TF-M.
-
JB: Do we have use cases defined on how these will be used
-
JH: For crypto services, yes. Device Identity, Audit Logs, building
blocks to secure an IoT device are some examples.
-
JB: People ready to start using?
-
JH: Yes in the edge space
-
JB: Understanding the use cases on problem solving would be helpful
-
JH: Focus has been on Cortex A use cases
-
Abhishek: Will work to close this vote soon.
Inclusive Language
-
Abhishek: Looks like sufficient support.
-
No budget required, so no formal vote required. Want a vote?
-
DC: Vote here is ok.
-
Don: Destination of wording?
-
JW: Propose into coding style guides
-
Abhishek: Could also be a developer wiki page.
-
I.e. Duplicate in each coding guidelines plus a common section on the
wiki.
-
Maintainers would be asked to add these to the Projects Coding
Guidelines.
-
DanH: Proposing having it in one place and pointing to it.
-
Abhishek: Formalize the decision. Then can decide how to deploy.
-
Don: Where is exact wording?
-
Abhishek: Propose an email vote and the email will include the exact
wording in the email. Also that the maintainer for each project is
responsible to integrate into their coding guidelines
Arm V8 → 8.4 transition
-
JB: Member Companies have expressed concerns about Arm V8 and changes
required to 84.. What should we tell people?
-
DanH: Don’t have to change S/W on 8.4.
-
Abhishek: How does Hafnium leverage it?
-
JB: Don’t want to forget this when making changes. All changes may not
be backward compatible.
-
DanH: Take back to Matteo / Shebu a discussion about a migration plan
-
JB: Impacts to OP TEE components important to this.
<end>
Hello,
FYI:
NXP has just started Inclusive Language Project to review sensitive terms and update terminology in alignment with industry changes:
"After researching industry best practices, we've decided to replace the following words and to discontinue using them in documents.
* Master/Slave -> replace with Leader/Follower, Primary/Replica or Primary/Standby
* Blacklist/Whitelist -> replace with Denylist/Allowlist
Additionally,
* we will discontinue using other terms that are gender-related or discriminating in future materials, including technical, marketing and quality documents.
* we are also updating our NXP Style Guide accordingly."
So, according this new declaration, NXP supports the proposed TF Inclusive Language guideline.
Best regards,
Andrej Butok
From: TSC <tsc-bounces(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org<mailto:tsc-bounces@lists.trustedfirmware.org>> On Behalf Of Abhishek Pandit via TSC
Sent: mardi 13 octobre 2020 15:32
To: tsc(a)lists.trustedfirmware.org<mailto:tsc@lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Subject: [TF-TSC] TSC Agenda 15 Oct 2020
Hi All,
Any agenda items for this week's meeting?
We have two existing topics which need to be decided by vote. Please do not reply to this email with your vote, there will be a separate email to the voting members.
1. Inclusive language guideline.
This is based on the discussion in the previous TSC meeting and the follow up proposal from Julius.
2. Trusted services project creation.
Arm team has been developing reference trusted services running in Secure EL0 that we plan to upstream in TF.org. This would form a new project to provide trusted services running on A profile devices.
The topic has already been discussed in board and Arm engineering team will provide further details in the TSC meeting.
Thanks
Abhishek
