Skip to content

Local sealing #6966

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Open
wants to merge 52 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Local sealing #6966

wants to merge 52 commits into from

Conversation

cjen1-msft
Copy link
Contributor

Add local sealing flow, to skip waiting for recovery shares when there is a previous sealed ledger secret.

This simply omits the submit_recovery_shares rpc, and still requires the transition_to_open proposal.

@cjen1-msft
Copy link
Contributor Author

This currently has a test for when a single node is chosen to recover. (infra.network.recover)
However we should really test that all nodes can try and recover successfully.

@cjen1-msft
Copy link
Contributor Author

/azp run

@cjen1-msft cjen1-msft marked this pull request as ready for review April 11, 2025 16:42
@cjen1-msft cjen1-msft requested a review from a team as a code owner April 11, 2025 16:42
Copy link

Azure Pipelines could not run because the pipeline triggers exclude this branch/path.

Copy link
Collaborator

@maxtropets maxtropets left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

lgtm

@@ -182,7 +182,7 @@ jobs:
./tests.sh --output-on-failure -L unit -j$(nproc --all) -E indexing
# Minimal end to end test that exercises SNP attestation verification
# but works within the current 4 core budget
./tests.sh --timeout 360 --output-on-failure -R code_update
./tests.sh --timeout 360 --output-on-failure -R "schema_test_cft"
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Don't forget to change it back?..

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yep just need a green CI run or 2 to be sure its actually working :/

@cjen1-msft
Copy link
Contributor Author

If this fails I am officially confused (it is failing on my snp machine).
There is a test to validate that a key which is derived from a given TCB cannot decrypt a secret sealed with a different TCB.

But the seemingly the valid_key_different_machine.corrupt secret can always be decrypted without error.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants