Change from passing verifier to passing measurements

[nick-mobilecoin]

Previously many interfaces that wished to attest to an enclave would
create and pass a verifier down to the logic that would eventually try
and verify the enclave's report.
Now these interfaces pass in a Vec<TrustedMeasurement> with all of the
measurements they wish to verify against. This isolates the logic for
how an enclave report is verified to support different verification
methods based on EPID vs DCAP.

[nick-mobilecoin]

Current dependencies on/for this PR:

• master
  • PR Create common measurement types for attestation #3369
    • PR Add TrustedMeasurement From impl to StatusVerifier #3377
      • PR Change from passing verifier to passing measurements #3375 👈

This comment was auto-generated by Graphite.

[cbeck88]

I find it a little funky that we pass Vec<TrustedMeasurements> rather than just TrustedMeasurements ? This is already a collection, right?

[cbeck88]

I feel like it might be simpler to pass just TrustedMeasurements, but fine either way

[nick-mobilecoin]

I find it a little funky that we pass Vec<TrustedMeasurements> rather than just TrustedMeasurements ? This is already a collection, right?

TrustedMeasurement is one measurement, a MrEnclave or a MrSigner version, not a collection.

[cbeck88]

I see, I got confused and thought it was this:

mobilecoin/attest/verifier/config/src/lib.rs

Line 114 in 2eb944a

pub struct TrustedMeasurementSet {

[cbeck88]

I think one concern i have with passing sets of measurements around is that different advisories may apply to them but there will be no way to express that in the api. Part of the motivation for the attest verifier config crate

[cbeck88]

Misclick sorry

[cbeck88]

Part of the motivation for the attest verifier config crate was that SW hardening advisories may be fixed in newer enclave versions but not in historical ones, so apis that just pass lists of measurements around without tracking that are kind of fucked -- there's no way to capture that.

I know that's the status quo right now, but James blocked earlier PRs that i made that were along the lines of what you are doing now

[cbeck88]

Lets pass TrustedMeasurementSet or a list of StatusVerifierConfig or something that associates hardening advisories to individual MRENCLAVE etc.

[nick-mobilecoin]

Lets pass TrustedMeasurementSet or a list of StatusVerifierConfig or something that associates hardening advisories to individual MRENCLAVE etc.

It may be a naming thing with with the ambiguity of "measurement"
In this PR the TrustedMrEnclaveMeasurement and the TrustedMrSignerMeasurement includes the advisories:

• mobilecoin/attest/verifier/config/src/lib.rs

  Line 31 in 21f3ded

  pub struct TrustedMrEnclaveMeasurement {

• mobilecoin/attest/verifier/config/src/lib.rs

  Line 105 in 21f3ded

  pub struct TrustedMrSignerMeasurement {

pub struct TrustedMrEnclaveMeasurement {
    /// The MRENCLAVE measurement
    ///
    /// For JSON this will be hex-encoded bytes.
    #[serde(with = "hex", rename = "MRENCLAVE")]
    mr_enclave: [u8; 32],
    /// The list of config advisories that are known to be mitigated in
    /// software at this enclave revision.
    #[serde(default)]
    mitigated_config_advisories: Vec<String>,
    /// The list of hardening advisories that are known to be mitigated in
    /// software at this enclave revision.
    #[serde(default)]
    mitigated_hardening_advisories: Vec<String>,
}

[cbeck88]

Okay, i get it now, thanks

[nick-mobilecoin]

I wonder what a good name would for these
"measurement" was already a bit overloaded as it's use in the SGX SDK only captured the mrsigner key value and not the ISVSVN and product ID.

[cbeck88]

Gonna go drink my coffee 😮‍💨 😁☕

[github-actions]

❌ Heads up, I tried building android-bindings using this branch and it failed.
Build logs can be found by inspecting the github action run Check that repositories submoduling us will still build after this PR / android-bindings or by clicking here.

[github-actions]

❌ Heads up, I tried building full-service using this branch and it failed.
Build logs can be found by inspecting the github action run Check that repositories submoduling us will still build after this PR / full-service or by clicking here.

[nick-mobilecoin]

Kicking for re-review since I was waiting for the mc-attestation-verifier crate to come in and this resulted in more than minor changes once it rebased.