---
# System prepended metadata

title: 'Attestation: Attestation Verifiers and solutions for supporting attestation for multiple platforms/providers'

---

# Attestation: Attestation Verifiers and solutions for supporting attestation for multiple platforms/providers

Moderator: Felix

# Derek Miller, Thomas Fossati


## Roll Call:
- *add your name here*


## Concepts

- [Remote Attestation Procedures Architecture: Architectural Overview](https://ietf-rats-wg.github.io/architecture/draft-ietf-rats-architecture.html#figure-1)
- A verifier verifies evidence for the relying party
- [OPERA](https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3319535.3354220) 
- EATS (IETF)

### Requirements
- Verifier needs to run in a TEE itself

### Multi-platform solution
- Having a "super verifier" to bridge IoT devices and different verifiers/attesters (Intel, AMD etc.)
- is there a language/framework for combining attestation evidence in a scalable (and maintainable) way?
            - 
- Category 1: multiple verifiers, I could trust several verifiers
- Category 2: 1 super verifier with endorsers (HW manufacturers)
- Category 3: 1 proxy verifier that has trust relationships with multiple backend verifiers

would be good for the arch/framework to articulate a trust-verification control plane - which could use TEE's themselves (and support hierarchy or peer-to-peer models) 

The optimal case requires the relying party to have the logic to parse and process the evidence, reference, and endorsements

## Examples

- Microsoft Azure Attestation

## Questions

- Who verifies the verifier?
    - Relying party has a mini verifier built in (one of the RATS architecture solutions proposal)
- How do I know the verifier is trustworthy?
- In the Arm model, who counts as the HW manufacturer? Arm? Arm partners? It makes writing a generic relying party for Arm difficult
    - each HW manufacturer implementing ARM architecture can use the standardized PSA Evidence format (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-tschofenig-rats-psa-token/08/). For HW claims specific to that HW Manufacturer the relying party needs to be aware of the proprietary specific extension / format




Follow ups:
- *what cool stuff did you learn?*
- *what should the community do next?*
