[RTE-659] Adding TDX Collateral collection in the `dcap-artifact-retrieval` and `pcs` crate #855

gilanghamidy · 2026-01-01T23:10:49Z

Adding the support for TDX collateral data and extending the existing TcbInfo types to be able to distinguish over SGX or TDX collateral types.

The PCCS functionality has no unit test yet awaiting the confirmation of the update on Fortanix PCCS server.

intel-sgx/dcap-artifact-retrieval/src/provisioning_client/intel.rs

intel-sgx/dcap-artifact-retrieval/src/provisioning_client/mod.rs

intel-sgx/enclave-runner/src/lib.rs

intel-sgx/pcs/src/qe_identity.rs

intel-sgx/pcs/src/tcb_info.rs

intel-sgx/pcs/src/qe_identity.rs

intel-sgx/dcap-artifact-retrieval/src/provisioning_client/azure.rs

intel-sgx/dcap-artifact-retrieval/src/provisioning_client/intel.rs

raoulstrackx · 2026-01-08T18:06:34Z

intel-sgx/pcs/src/tcb_info.rs

+}
+
+pub trait PlatformTypeWithTcbDeserializer<T: PlatformType> : PlatformType {
+    fn deserialize<'de, D>(deserializer: D) -> Result<TcbData<T, Unverified>, D::Error>


PlatformType is already a super trait of PlatformTypeWithTcbDeserializer so why do you need a generic type here?

This is to introduce the T of PlatformType type so it can be passed as generic to TcbData<T, Unverified> in the Result type. Then the making it super trait allows to simplify the other user codes.

Instead of using the generic constraint PlatformType + PlatformTypeDeserializer<T>, the relevant code can just use a single PlatformTypeWithDeserializer<T> which will also definitely requires the type to have PlatformType trait.

intel-sgx/pcs/src/pckcrt.rs

intel-sgx/pcs/src/tcb_info.rs

intel-sgx/pcs/src/qe_identity.rs

gilanghamidy · 2026-01-08T23:24:57Z

I am thinking about it again, I think the PckCrt needs to also carry the generic type, as SGX and TDX PckCrt will carry different TcbComponent element depending on the TEE platform type. I think I need another major refactoring in this

intel-sgx/pcs/src/io.rs

intel-sgx/dcap-artifact-retrieval/src/provisioning_client/intel.rs

raoulstrackx · 2026-01-13T15:26:32Z

intel-sgx/dcap-artifact-retrieval/src/provisioning_client/mod.rs

-    fn tcbinfo(&self, fmspc: &Fmspc, evaluation_data_number: Option<u16>) -> Result<TcbInfo, Error>;
+    fn tcbinfo(&self, fmspc: &Fmspc, evaluation_data_number: Option<u16>) -> Result<TcbInfo<platform::SGX>, Error>;
+
+    fn tcbinfo_tdx(&self, fmspc: &Fmspc, evaluation_data_number: Option<u16>) -> Result<TcbInfo<platform::TDX>, Error>;


Could you use the generic in the function call as well?

I will check again about it, I thought because the generic is not used in the type parameter, it would not work.

Checked, this is impossible as it requires the entire Client, Fetcher type to be parameterized as well. We have to do it like this.

raoulstrackx · 2026-01-13T15:26:42Z

intel-sgx/dcap-artifact-retrieval/src/provisioning_client/mod.rs


    fn qe_identity(&self, evaluation_data_number: Option<u16>) -> Result<QeIdentitySigned, Error>;

+    fn tdqe_identity(&self, evaluation_data_number: Option<u16>) -> Result<QeIdentitySigned, Error>;


Could you use the generic in the function call as well?

Same as above

intel-sgx/pcs/src/lib.rs

raoulstrackx · 2026-01-13T15:32:58Z

intel-sgx/pcs/src/lib.rs

 }

+pub trait PlatformType : Into<Platform> + Display + Clone {
+    fn new() -> Self;


Is this used?

Yes for default instantiation of the generic type in custom serializer/deserializer

intel-sgx/pcs/src/lib.rs

raoulstrackx · 2026-01-13T15:43:21Z

intel-sgx/pcs/src/pckcrt.rs

 /// TCB component as specified in the Intel PCKCrt API v3 and v4
 #[derive(Serialize, Deserialize, Debug, Default)]
-struct IntelSgxTcbComponentsV3 {
+pub struct IntelSgxTcbComponentsV3 {


Why does this need to be pub now?

Because the type is used in function signature of a pub trait

raoulstrackx · 2026-01-14T15:53:45Z

intel-sgx/pcs/src/tcb_info.rs


-impl<'de> Deserialize<'de> for TcbData<Unverified> {
-    fn deserialize<D>(deserializer: D) -> Result<TcbData<Unverified>, D::Error>
+impl PlatformTypeForTcbInfo<platform::SGX> for platform::SGX {


I think you can do this simpler by parsing with a "unified" struct (using resulting in default impl where fields are missing). And ensuring that you have different impl for each generic. For example: TcbInfo<TDX> has a tdx_module function, that TcbInfo<SGX> simply does not have).

But then there will be unwrap as we may need to use Option type or the likes for that. It was previously written like that until your last comment to avoid unwrap in the accessor function.

gilanghamidy · 2026-01-16T20:36:13Z

intel-sgx/dcap-artifact-retrieval/src/provisioning_client/pccs.rs

-    pub fn tcb_evaluation_data_numbers() {
-        let root_ca = include_bytes!("../../tests/data/root_SGX_CA_der.cert");
-        let root_cas = [&root_ca[..]];
-        let client = make_client(PcsVersion::V4);
-        let eval_numbers = client.tcb_evaluation_data_numbers().unwrap();
-
-        let eval_numbers2 = serde_json::ser::to_vec(&eval_numbers)
-            .and_then(|v| serde_json::from_slice::<RawTcbEvaluationDataNumbers>(&v))
-            .unwrap();
-        assert_eq!(eval_numbers, eval_numbers2);
-
-        let fmspc = Fmspc::try_from("90806f000000").unwrap();
-        let eval_numbers: TcbEvaluationDataNumbers =
-            eval_numbers.verify(&root_cas, Platform::SGX).unwrap();
-        for number in eval_numbers.numbers().map(|n| n.number()) {
-            // TODO(#811): Since PCCS is cache service and not able to cache the
-            // `Gone` response mentioned below from Intel PCS, We need to change
-            // the test behavior to call QE ID API with update=standard to get the
-            // smallest TcbEvaluationDataNumber that's still available.
-            //
-            // Here, we temporarily fix this be hardcoding.
-            if number < 18 {
-                continue;
-            }
-            let qe_identity = match client.qe_identity(Some(number)) {
-                Ok(id) => id,
-                // API query with update="standard" will return QE Identity with TCB Evaluation Data Number M.
-                // A 410 Gone response is returned when the inputted TCB Evaluation Data Number is < M,
-                // so we ignore these TCB Evaluation Data Numbers.
-                Err(super::Error::PCSError(status_code, _)) if status_code == super::StatusCode::Gone => continue,
-                res @Err(_) => res.unwrap(),
-            };
-            let verified_qe_id = qe_identity
-                .verify(&root_cas, EnclaveIdentity::QE)
-                .unwrap();
-            assert_eq!(verified_qe_id.tcb_evaluation_data_number(), u64::from(number));
-
-            let tcb_info = client
-                    .tcbinfo(&fmspc, Some(number))
-                    .unwrap()
-                    .verify(&root_cas, Platform::SGX, 2)
-                    .unwrap();
-            assert_eq!(tcb_info.tcb_evaluation_data_number(), u64::from(number));
-        }
-    }


I remove this test because it is exactly the same as the intel provider unit test and the pccs provider actually uses the intel provider instead. I assume currently PCCS server does not directly support this API.

gilanghamidy · 2026-01-17T00:01:11Z

intel-sgx/pcs/src/pckcrt.rs

    /// Selects the highest matching TCB level
    /// see <https://api.portal.trustedservices.intel.com/documentation#pcs-tcb-info-v2>
-    pub fn find_tcb_state<V: VerificationType>(&self, tcb_data: &TcbData<V>) -> Option<TcbLevel> {
+    pub fn find_tcb_state<V: VerificationType>(&self, tcb_data: &TcbData<platform::SGX, V>) -> Option<TcbLevel<platform::SGX>> {


When checking our code that is doing verification, I think this method should accept any TCB data, not specifically only SGX TCB data. We found out that SGX and TDX TCB may have different SVN results, which I currently don't know which one that is embedded into the PCK Certificate.

I may have to refactor this again to reflect this function accepting TCB data for any T, not only for platform::SGX

…d TDX separately - `pcs` crate now introduces a static type to indicate if `TcbInfo` and `TcbComponent` is designated for SGX or TDX - Adjust `PckCert` to only allow SGX-type TCB components - QE Identity type now properly handle other than SGX QE, including TDQE, QVE, QAE altogether, especially for file handling - `dcap-artifact-retrieval` crate now supports obtaining TDX collateral from Intel services. Testing for PCCS server is pending update to the test server. - File name for TDX TcbInfo data has extra `.tdx` prefix - Applying TDX specific data on TcbComponent

- Consistency in `store` and `restore` function - Renaming `TcbComponents` variants that is used for backward compatibility - Addressing some warnings from linter - Reverting `QeIdentity` changes

…SGX TCB without TDX fields

with generic

Taowyoo · 2026-01-31T09:20:49Z

intel-sgx/pcs/src/io.rs

-    filename: &str,
-) -> Result<Option<PathBuf>, Error> {
+/// Write given object in json to given filename under given dir.
+pub fn write_to_file<T: serde::ser::Serialize>(obj: &T, dir: &str, filename: &str, options: WriteOptions) -> Result<Option<PathBuf>, Error> {


Could we keep the rustdoc as detailed as old code ?

Taowyoo · 2026-01-31T09:33:13Z

intel-sgx/pcs/src/tcb_info.rs

+    }
+}
+
+#[allow(dead_code)]


I think these dead_code and unused should be able to remove since they should be coverred by your tests?

Taowyoo · 2026-01-31T09:35:23Z

intel-sgx/pcs/src/pckcrt.rs

+
+#[derive(Clone, Debug, Default, Eq, PartialEq)]
+pub struct TcbComponentsV4<T: PlatformTypeForTcbComponent<T>> {
+    sgxtcbcomponents: [TcbComponentEntry; 16],


typo sgxtcbcomponents ? I assume this should be generic to both sgx and tdx?

Taowyoo · 2026-01-31T09:46:37Z

intel-sgx/dcap-artifact-retrieval/src/provisioning_client/azure.rs

could we add tdx test cases

gilanghamidy requested review from aditijannu, raoulstrackx and sardok January 1, 2026 23:10

raoulstrackx reviewed Jan 5, 2026

View reviewed changes

gilanghamidy force-pushed the gilang/rte659-tdx-attestation-collateral branch from 47752ee to 87b2500 Compare January 5, 2026 12:17

raoulstrackx reviewed Jan 6, 2026

View reviewed changes

intel-sgx/dcap-artifact-retrieval/src/provisioning_client/azure.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

gilanghamidy force-pushed the gilang/rte659-tdx-attestation-collateral branch 5 times, most recently from c70c94e to a3ad696 Compare January 7, 2026 13:50

raoulstrackx reviewed Jan 8, 2026

View reviewed changes

intel-sgx/pcs/src/qe_identity.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

gilanghamidy force-pushed the gilang/rte659-tdx-attestation-collateral branch 4 times, most recently from 8bd7c6c to 1b361ee Compare January 12, 2026 17:21

raoulstrackx reviewed Jan 14, 2026

View reviewed changes

gilanghamidy force-pushed the gilang/rte659-tdx-attestation-collateral branch from 6ec7fbd to 37b25fc Compare January 16, 2026 20:32

gilanghamidy commented Jan 16, 2026

View reviewed changes

gilanghamidy force-pushed the gilang/rte659-tdx-attestation-collateral branch 3 times, most recently from 398e733 to 6422572 Compare January 16, 2026 21:48

gilanghamidy commented Jan 17, 2026

View reviewed changes

gilanghamidy force-pushed the gilang/rte659-tdx-attestation-collateral branch 4 times, most recently from 5b0f8e4 to aae5f90 Compare January 17, 2026 12:02

gilanghamidy added the TDX label Jan 18, 2026

gilanghamidy force-pushed the gilang/rte659-tdx-attestation-collateral branch 2 times, most recently from bac2790 to e1d480a Compare January 25, 2026 22:52

gilanghamidy and others added 9 commits January 25, 2026 23:52

Refactoring IO for overwriting file

577acc8

Add TCB Evaluation Numbers

0b22b72

Simplifying types and renaming types and function for consistencies

e170df1

- Consistency in `store` and `restore` function - Renaming `TcbComponents` variants that is used for backward compatibility - Addressing some warnings from linter - Reverting `QeIdentity` changes

Allow comparing any type of TcbInfo with PckCrt that only stores …

fe965ea

…SGX TCB without TDX fields

Bump major version to pcs and dcap-artifact-retrieval

c8585bc

Introducing trait to select function from ProvisioningClient instance

1b20b6d

with generic

Adding Send trait to PlatformType

e8d1864

Make filename public

064efb0

gilanghamidy force-pushed the gilang/rte659-tdx-attestation-collateral branch from e1d480a to 064efb0 Compare January 25, 2026 22:53

gilanghamidy requested a review from tvsfx January 26, 2026 09:23

Taowyoo added C-pcs Crate: pcs C-dcap-artifact-retrieval Crate: dcap-artifact-retrieval labels Jan 31, 2026

Taowyoo reviewed Jan 31, 2026

View reviewed changes


		fn qe_identity(&self, evaluation_data_number: Option<u16>) -> Result<QeIdentitySigned, Error>;

		fn tdqe_identity(&self, evaluation_data_number: Option<u16>) -> Result<QeIdentitySigned, Error>;

[RTE-659] Adding TDX Collateral collection in the dcap-artifact-retrieval and pcs crate #855

Are you sure you want to change the base?

[RTE-659] Adding TDX Collateral collection in the dcap-artifact-retrieval and pcs crate #855

Uh oh!

Conversation

gilanghamidy commented Jan 1, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

gilanghamidy commented Jan 8, 2026

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

gilanghamidy Jan 16, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

gilanghamidy Jan 17, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

4 participants

[RTE-659] Adding TDX Collateral collection in the `dcap-artifact-retrieval` and `pcs` crate #855

[RTE-659] Adding TDX Collateral collection in the `dcap-artifact-retrieval` and `pcs` crate #855

gilanghamidy commented Jan 1, 2026 •

edited

Loading

gilanghamidy Jan 16, 2026 •

edited

Loading

gilanghamidy Jan 17, 2026 •

edited

Loading