[Starlingx-discuss] Incorrect public key for signed starlingX 5.0 iso .

Kumar, Chandan Chandan.Kumar at commscope.com
Tue Jul 5 07:19:10 UTC 2022


Hi Greg,

Thanks for acknowledgement.

I have raised starlingx launchpad  for document update. Meanwhile it would be really great if you can share the steps which has to be done to integrate signing of images as part of StarlingX build infrastructure.

Regards,
Chandan Kumar.

From: Waines, Greg <Greg.Waines at windriver.com>
Sent: Monday, July 4, 2022 6:00 PM
To: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io
Cc: Little, Scott <Scott.Little at windriver.com>
Subject: Re: [Starlingx-discuss] Incorrect public key for signed starlingX 5.0 iso .

Hey Chandan, Thanks for bringing this up. I chatted with Scott about this. Currently the StarlingX public builds on CENGN are not building a secure boot capable load … i.e. signing the appropriate ite
External (greg.waines at windriver.com<mailto:greg.waines at windriver.com>)
  Report This Email<https://protection.inkyphishfence.com/report?id=Y29tbXNjb3BlL2NoYW5kYW4ua3VtYXJAY29tbXNjb3BlLmNvbS9jZjY4ZjM3ZmUxZmI3MzgxYzA2YmE4MzMxYzk5OTdiZC8xNjU2OTM4MTA2Ljg=#key=6373599a85b38090323abd4fd48e66ec>  FAQ<https://www.inky.com/banner-faq>  Protection by INKY<https://www.inky.com/protection-by-inky>

Hey Chandan,

Thanks for bringing this up.

I chatted with Scott about this.

Currently the StarlingX public builds on CENGN are not building a secure boot capable load … i.e. signing the appropriate items to enable secure boot.  Although the StarlingX build infrastructure allows it to be added.
Neither of these points are properly documented in docs.starlingx.io   ☹

I can’t remember the details of why we are not doing this.
I am guessing that the thinking was that a user of StarlingX that wanted to use UEFI Secure Boot, would want to sign with his own private key.

Can you raise a starlingx launchpad ( https://launchpad.net/starlingx<https://secure-web.cisco.com/1mVLF-b4c-tBpQaEbNZbIeg5wuI2Sgdw11Kg2fRT9qRF2wo07vvRq040DIA0_Wsi3D4gtikjd41f-NbhgDr0WtPQQBHE441l65nwt6p00kAsBdGTNHMs0SRRp5xooNafH_Whk-Dm4t5akvM7v59ubFU1OqnyVm_DWXmTRsjlP7iavYNBqohwIkDwu5U_0bdpFU4p4YPP0Lf9wDBMltx2noOl9B-SkedaJ-aS-ZXVVTe6xH6VLXYIALMIH-dnrPQ7c4Gq8UZlj5vmUSNdnMlN2-alEns4KcCDiDF4IpogwjWO9-Bzcr272kWadoiBLaMmvU4L7OKnYa3EnFa8xAAyVJA/https%3A%2F%2Flaunchpad.net%2Fstarlingx> ) to address the docs.starlingx.io documentation issue, i.e. to indicate that the StarlingX CENGN builds are not signed to support uefi secure boot, and describe how a starlingx user could add signing to their StarlingX build environment in order to sign for uefi secure boot with their own private key ?

Greg.


From: Scott Little <scott.little at windriver.com<mailto:scott.little at windriver.com>>
Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2022 10:42 AM
To: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io<mailto:starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io>
Subject: Re: [Starlingx-discuss] Incorrect public key for signed starlingX 5.0 iso .

On 2022-06-02 13:12, Kumar, Chandan wrote:
[Please note: This e-mail is from an EXTERNAL e-mail address]
Hi,

I am trying to validate signed starlingX 5.0 iso on a secureboot enabled setup against public key(TiBoot.crt) embedded inside iso. After rebooting , operating system is not coming up with error screen saying “Verification failed: (0X1A) Security Violation”.

However, when I signed images with self-generated private key and validated against corresponding public key, system is able to boot up successfully. Signing is done after flashing the iso on a server. Please find attached procedure for signing images inside iso.
I believe, the public key provided with iso is not correct. Can you please confirm ?

Regards,
Chandan Kumar.


_______________________________________________

Starlingx-discuss mailing list

Starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io<mailto:Starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io>

http://lists.starlingx.io/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/starlingx-discuss<https://secure-web.cisco.com/1-KIhdgnDGw2i_w1bSfhcdQdJ0gtuSiGAoU-ggPInTuBelT92KbXPGwz89fztx-5CLsTQfshXKTc3aaqqJ-Mq4BnErMA5jCPj57X8BHou8RtYoI0fF-kIFVYYVX9qbmwnPrfape21hfY5wqnypwaoc7s_IL-RIFlZBKWMVC32JZy9GB4EI2XPFktp20B16JE2vxi4esR5XfNXcqUCBA5HqY3LGwMpw_r-Lz3Kxs5sFgxDJWsJNwol2lbAUfTEnyexbAghOCdz5cQrYRbu4HbMGraGchOZUlVwI22gkKpWT_z874pdrPIYAmShanAKy0bpA3IG3jgV79cAljguedbamQ/https%3A%2F%2Furldefense.com%2Fv3%2F__http%3A%2Flists.starlingx.io%2Fcgi-bin%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fstarlingx-discuss__%3B%21%21AjveYdw8EvQ%21e8leCxdSWn7CF5mepfpbV18UcLDSxfeu8JA2iW4ux5kQ7-Dya9uodepzEl_9Pj1QzoD5CDyT3LJdh6si3eZDcLl5VHlseg%24>

Thanks for the report.   I'll look into it

Scott Little


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.starlingx.io/pipermail/starlingx-discuss/attachments/20220705/e7d4c06b/attachment.htm>


More information about the Starlingx-discuss mailing list