RadeonSI Gallium3D Adds Support for EGL Protected Surfaces Using AMDGPU TMZ

[phoronix]

Phoronix: RadeonSI Gallium3D Adds Support for EGL Protected Surfaces Using AMDGPU TMZ

Landing in Mesa 20.3 during this final week of feature development is support in RadeonSI Gallium3D for EGL_EXT_protected_surface. This long-standing EGL extension allows surfaces/windows to beset as protected and in which case the contents are only accessible to secure accesses. Outside/insecure accesses to the window (surface) contents are blocked...

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=RadeonSI-EGL-Protected-TMZ

[FireBurn]

My Raven system finally has working TMZ support since a firmware update sorted the amd-tee stuff

[CochainComplex]

Does anyone of you have some sources maybe rumours how the plan of Netflix and Amazon etc are to make 4k Streams legally feasible on Linux (not android)? Even proper FullHD for Amazon would already be a step forward.

[uid313]

I do not want this. How can I disable this?
Is it possible to have this extension appear as supported but really not be implemented?

[klokik]

Is it possible to have this extension appear as supported but really not be implemented?

Likely you can, but that wouldn't make much sense: the idea is to do whole decryption in a "secure" (from the user) environment, thus entire decoding and display pipeline should be done in encrypted memory inaccessible to the host system. If you fake presence of protected surface support, best case you'll get garbage instead of an image on the screen (because of an attempt to display said encrypted memory without decryption stage), worst case depends on a stub implementation.

[Serafean]

Likely you can, but that wouldn't make much sense: the idea is to do whole decryption in a "secure" (from the user) environment, thus whole decoding and display pipeline should be done in encrypted memory inaccessible the host system. If you fake presence of protected surface support, best case you'll get garbage instead of image on the screen (because of an attempt to display said encrypted memory without decoding stage), worst case depends on a stub implementation.

Technically nothing prevents you from rewriting the extension using non-encrypted memory, and fake the "encrypted" decode API the entire way up.

[Venemo]

I'm happy to see this feature.

Everyone who doesn't want it, you can choose not to use it.

[karolherbst]

Technically nothing prevents you from rewriting the extension using non-encrypted memory, and fake the "encrypted" decode API the entire way up.

problem is, the content you get is already encrypted.

[pal666]

I do not want this.

if you don't want to watch netflix, just don't pay for it, problem solved

[angrypie]

Remember that every part of your computer is a tiny computer on its own, doing stuff you didn't tell it to since you powered it on for the first time. All encrypted, of course--but not by you. Exposing it on software is definitely not a big deal.