Re: [PATCH RFC 00/20] attestation: Add a common subsystem and TDX support

[James Bottomley]

On Thu, 2026-10-22 at 16:45 -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 22, 2026 at 03:37:46PM -0400, Mimi Zohar wrote:
> 
> > > Advisory entries shouldn't matter with a scheme like this.
> > 
> > IMA has something called violations (e.g. open-writers, ToMToU),
> > which are more
> > than just advisory.  They intentionally invalidate the IMA
> > measurement list
> > since the measurement cannot be trusted.
> 
> Maybe I got lost, but when James said "advisory" I understood this as
> the TCG type that does not get included in a PCR extend.

No, I meant the TCG type where the event description isn't part of the
measurement (and thus can contain pretty much anything).  In IMA
measurements, the path is part of the log but isn't part of the
measurement (primarily because it's not reliable: a mount namespace
could make it anything it wants).

Regards,

James