[MS-TPMVSC]:

Trusted Platform Module (TPM) Virtual Smart Card Management Protocol

Intellectual Property Rights Notice for Open Specifications Documentation

§  Technical Documentation. Microsoft publishes Open Specifications documentation (“this documentation”) for protocols, file formats, data portability, computer languages, and standards support. Additionally, overview documents cover inter-protocol relationships and interactions.

§  Copyrights. This documentation is covered by Microsoft copyrights. Regardless of any other terms that are contained in the terms of use for the Microsoft website that hosts this documentation, you can make copies of it in order to develop implementations of the technologies that are described in this documentation and can distribute portions of it in your implementations that use these technologies or in your documentation as necessary to properly document the implementation. You can also distribute in your implementation, with or without modification, any schemas, IDLs, or code samples that are included in the documentation. This permission also applies to any documents that are referenced in the Open Specifications documentation.

§  No Trade Secrets. Microsoft does not claim any trade secret rights in this documentation.

§  Patents. Microsoft has patents that might cover your implementations of the technologies described in the Open Specifications documentation. Neither this notice nor Microsoft's delivery of this documentation grants any licenses under those patents or any other Microsoft patents. However, a given Open Specifications document might be covered by the Microsoft Open Specifications Promise or the Microsoft Community Promise. If you would prefer a written license, or if the technologies described in this documentation are not covered by the Open Specifications Promise or Community Promise, as applicable, patent licenses are available by contacting .

§  License Programs. To see all of the protocols in scope under a specific license program and the associated patents, visit the Patent Map.

§  Trademarks. The names of companies and products contained in this documentation might be covered by trademarks or similar intellectual property rights. This notice does not grant any licenses under those rights. For a list of Microsoft trademarks, visit www.microsoft.com/trademarks.

§  Fictitious Names. The example companies, organizations, products, domain names, email addresses, logos, people, places, and events that are depicted in this documentation are fictitious. No association with any real company, organization, product, domain name, email address, logo, person, place, or event is intended or should be inferred.

Reservation of Rights. All other rights are reserved, and this notice does not grant any rights other than as specifically described above, whether by implication, estoppel, or otherwise.

Tools. The Open Specifications documentation does not require the use of Microsoft programming tools or programming environments in order for you to develop an implementation. If you have access to Microsoft programming tools and environments, you are free to take advantage of them. Certain Open Specifications documents are intended for use in conjunction with publicly available standards specifications and network programming art and, as such, assume that the reader either is familiar with the aforementioned material or has immediate access to it.

Support. For questions and support, please contact .

Revision Summary

Date / Revision History / Revision Class / Comments /
3/30/2012 / 1.0 / New / Released new document.
7/12/2012 / 1.0 / None / No changes to the meaning, language, or formatting of the technical content.
10/25/2012 / 1.0 / None / No changes to the meaning, language, or formatting of the technical content.
1/31/2013 / 1.0 / None / No changes to the meaning, language, or formatting of the technical content.
8/8/2013 / 2.0 / Major / Significantly changed the technical content.
11/14/2013 / 2.0 / None / No changes to the meaning, language, or formatting of the technical content.
2/13/2014 / 2.0 / None / No changes to the meaning, language, or formatting of the technical content.
5/15/2014 / 2.0 / None / No changes to the meaning, language, or formatting of the technical content.
6/30/2015 / 3.0 / Major / Significantly changed the technical content.
10/16/2015 / 3.0 / None / No changes to the meaning, language, or formatting of the technical content.
7/14/2016 / 3.0 / None / No changes to the meaning, language, or formatting of the technical content.
6/1/2017 / 3.0 / None / No changes to the meaning, language, or formatting of the technical content.

Table of Contents

1 Introduction 5

1.1 Glossary 5

1.2 References 5

1.2.1 Normative References 5

1.2.2 Informative References 6

1.3 Overview 6

1.4 Relationship to Other Protocols 7

1.5 Prerequisites/Preconditions 8

1.6 Applicability Statement 8

1.7 Versioning and Capability Negotiation 8

1.8 Vendor Extensible Fields 8

1.9 Standards Assignments 8

2 Messages 10

2.1 Transport 10

2.2 Common Data Types 10

2.2.1 Enumerations 10

2.2.1.1 TPMVSCMGR_ERROR 11

2.2.1.2 TPMVSCMGR_STATUS 12

2.2.1.3 SmartCardPinCharacterPolicyOption 13

2.2.1.4 TPMVSC_ATTESTATION_TYPE 13

2.2.2 Structures 13

2.2.2.1 PinPolicySerialization 14

3 Protocol Details 15

3.1 ITpmVirtualSmartCardManager Server Details 15

3.1.1 Abstract Data Model 15

3.1.2 Timers 15

3.1.3 Initialization 15

3.1.4 Message Processing Events and Sequencing Rules 15

3.1.4.1 CreateVirtualSmartCard (Opnum 3) 16

3.1.4.2 DestroyVirtualSmartCard (Opnum 4) 17

3.1.5 Timer Events 18

3.1.6 Other Local Events 18

3.2 ITpmVirtualSmartCardManagerStatusCallback Server Details 18

3.2.1 Abstract Data Model 18

3.2.2 Timers 18

3.2.3 Initialization 18

3.2.4 Message Processing Events and Sequencing Rules 19

3.2.4.1 ReportProgress (Opnum 3) 19

3.2.4.2 ReportError (Opnum 4) 19

3.2.5 Timer Events 20

3.2.6 Other Local Events 20

3.3 ITpmVirtualSmartCardManager2 Server Details 20

3.3.1 Abstract Data Model 20

3.3.2 Timers 20

3.3.3 Initialization 20

3.3.4 Message Processing Events and Sequencing Rules 20

3.3.4.1 CreateVirtualSmartCardWithPinPolicy (Opnum 5) 20

3.3.5 Timer Events 22

3.3.6 Other Local Events 22

3.4 ITpmVirtualSmartCardManager3 Server Details 22

3.4.1 Abstract Data Model 23

3.4.2 Timers 23

3.4.3 Initialization 23

3.4.4 Message Processing Events and Sequencing Rules 23

3.4.4.1 CreateVirtualSmartCardWithAttestation (Opnum 6) 23

3.4.5 Timer Events 25

3.4.6 Other Local Events 25

4 Protocol Examples 26

4.1 Create a VSC without Status Callback 26

4.2 Create a VSC with Status Callback 26

5 Security 28

5.1 Security Considerations for Implementers 28

5.2 Index of Security Parameters 28

6 Appendix A: Full IDL 29

7 Appendix B: Product Behavior 33

8 Change Tracking 34

9 Index 35

1  Introduction

The DCOM Interfaces for Trusted Platform Module (TPM) Virtual Smart Card Management Protocol is used to manage virtual smart cards (VSCs) on a remote machine, such as those based on trusted platform modules (TPM). It provides methods for a protocol client to request creation and destruction of VSCs and to monitor the status of these operations.

Sections 1.5, 1.8, 1.9, 2, and 3 of this specification are normative. All other sections and examples in this specification are informative.

1.1  Glossary

This document uses the following terms:

certification authority (CA): A third party that issues public key certificates. Certificates serve to bind public keys to a user identity. Each user and certification authority (CA) can decide whether to trust another user or CA for a specific purpose, and whether this trust should be transitive. For more information, see [RFC3280].

virtual smart card (VSC): A combination of hardware, software and firmware that implements the same interface as a smart card but is not necessarily restricted to the same physical form factors. For example, virtual smart cards may be implemented entirely in software, or they may use the cryptographic capabilities of specific hardware such as a TPM.

MAY, SHOULD, MUST, SHOULD NOT, MUST NOT: These terms (in all caps) are used as defined in [RFC2119]. All statements of optional behavior use either MAY, SHOULD, or SHOULD NOT.

1.2  References

Links to a document in the Microsoft Open Specifications library point to the correct section in the most recently published version of the referenced document. However, because individual documents in the library are not updated at the same time, the section numbers in the documents may not match. You can confirm the correct section numbering by checking the Errata.

1.2.1  Normative References

We conduct frequent surveys of the normative references to assure their continued availability. If you have any issue with finding a normative reference, please contact . We will assist you in finding the relevant information.

[C706] The Open Group, "DCE 1.1: Remote Procedure Call", C706, August 1997, https://www2.opengroup.org/ogsys/catalog/c706

[MS-DCOM] Microsoft Corporation, "Distributed Component Object Model (DCOM) Remote Protocol".

[MS-DTYP] Microsoft Corporation, "Windows Data Types".

[MS-ERREF] Microsoft Corporation, "Windows Error Codes".

[MS-RPCE] Microsoft Corporation, "Remote Procedure Call Protocol Extensions".

[MS-SPNG] Microsoft Corporation, "Simple and Protected GSS-API Negotiation Mechanism (SPNEGO) Extension".

[PCSC3] PC/SC Workgroup, "Interoperability Specification for ICCs and Personal Computer Systems - Part 3: Requirements for PC-Connected Interface Devices", December 1997, http://www.pcscworkgroup.com/specifications/V1/p3v10doc

[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997, http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2119.txt

[RFC4178] Zhu, L., Leach, P., Jaganathan, K., and Ingersoll, W., "The Simple and Protected Generic Security Service Application Program Interface (GSS-API) Negotiation Mechanism", RFC 4178, October 2005, http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc4178.txt

[SP800-67] National Institute of Standards and Technology., "Special Publication 800-67, Revision 1, Recommendation for the Triple Data Encryption Algorithm (TDEA) Block Cipher", January 2012, http://csrc.nist.gov/publications/nistpubs/800-67-Rev1/SP-800-67-Rev1.pdf

1.2.2  Informative References

None.

1.3  Overview

The DCOM Interfaces for the Trusted Platform Module (TPM) Virtual Smart Card Management Protocol provides a Distributed Component Object Model (DCOM) Remote Protocol [MS-DCOM] interface used for creating and destroying VSCs. Like all other DCOM interfaces, this protocol uses RPC [C706], with the extensions specified in [MS-RPCE], as its underlying protocol. A VSC is a device that presents a device interface complying with the PC/SC specification for PC-connected interface devices [PCSC3] to its host operating system (OS) platform. This protocol does not assume anything about the underlying implementation of VSC devices. In particular, while it is primarily intended for the management of VSCs based on TPMs, it can also be used to manage other types of VSCs. The protocol defines two interfaces: a primary interface which is used to request VSC operations on a target system, and a secondary interface which is used by that target system to return status and progress information to the requestor.

In a typical scenario, this protocol is used by a requestor (generally an administrative workstation) to manage VSC devices on a target (generally an end-user workstation). The requestor, acting as a client, connects to the ITpmVirtualSmartCardManager, ITpmVirtualSmartCardManager2, or ITpmVirtualSmartCardManager3 interface on the target (which acts as the server) and requests the target to either create or destroy a VSC by passing appropriate parameters. These parameters include a reference to an ITpmVirtualSmartCardManagerStatusCallback DCOM interface on the requestor that can be used to provide status updates through callbacks.

The principal difference between the ITpmVirtualSmartCardManager2 interface and the ITpmVirtualSmartCardManager3 interface is that the latter supports creation of attestation-capable virtual smart cards.

The principal difference between the ITpmVirtualSmartCardManager interface and the ITpmVirtualSmartCardManager2 interface is that the latter supports policies to define valid values for the smart-card PIN.

The target, after validating these parameters, starts executing the requested operation. It also opens a second connection back to the requestor over which it invokes the requestor’s ITpmVirtualSmartCardManagerStatusCallback interface as a client, and calls the appropriate functions of that interface to provide progress or error codes. When the operation is completed, the target closes this second connection and returns the result for the requestor’s original method invocation.

This entire process is illustrated in Figure 1.

Figure 1: Typical protocol scenario

1.4  Relationship to Other Protocols

The DCOM Interfaces for the TPM Virtual Smart Card Management Protocol relies on the Distributed Component Object Model (DCOM) Remote Protocol, as specified in [MS-DCOM], which uses RPC [MS-RPCE] as its transport. A diagram of these relationships is shown in the following figure:

Figure 2: Protocol Relationships

1.5  Prerequisites/Preconditions

This protocol is implemented over DCOM and RPC. Therefore, it has the prerequisites specified in [MS-DCOM] and [MS-RPCE] as being common to protocols that depend on DCOM and RPC respectively.

This protocol also requires a compliant implementation of [PCSC3], as well as any additional host OS facilities required to support the creation of VSCs, on the target.

This protocol requires the use of a secure RPC connection. The requestor is required to possess the credentials of an administrative user on the target, and both requestor and target are required to support security packages that implement support for impersonation as well as packet privacy and integrity.

1.6  Applicability Statement

This protocol is applicable to scenarios where it is desirable to remotely manage VSC devices on a computer with a smart card implementation compliant with [PCSC3].

1.7  Versioning and Capability Negotiation

This document covers versioning issues in the following areas:

§  Supported Transports: This protocol uses the Distributed Component Object Model (DCOM) Remote Protocol [MS-DCOM], which in turn uses RPC over TCP as its only transport, as specified in section 2.1.

§  Protocol Versions: This protocol includes two DCOM interfaces (namely ITpmVirtualSmartCardManager and ITpmVirtualSmartCardManagerStatusCallback), both of which are version 0.0 as defined in section 2.2.

§  Security and Authentication Methods: Microsoft RPC, as defined in [MS-RPCE], is used to negotiate the authentication mechanism, as specified in [MS-SPNG] and in section 3.1.

§  Localization: This protocol uses predefined status codes and error codes. It is the caller’s responsibility to localize the status and error codes to localized strings.

§  Capability Negotiation: This protocol does not support explicit capability negotiation. However, as specified in section 3.1.4, the requestor can disable the use of the ITpmVirtualSmartCardManagerStatusCallback interface by providing a NULL callback parameter. Even if a callback parameter is provided by the requestor, the target can choose to not use the ITpmVirtualSmartCardManagerStatusCallback interface.