linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86/efi: Access EFI MMIO data as unencrypted when SEV is active

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAKv+Gu9OmTgoREKxvvK57ybF1JUfkNeVNa8efAHSau0EFzvbNg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 17 Jul 2018 11:12:38 +0800
From:   Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>
To:     Brijesh Singh <brijesh.singh@....com>
Cc:     "the arch/x86 maintainers" <x86@...nel.org>,
        linux-efi <linux-efi@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>,
        KVM devel mailing list <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
        Matt Fleming <matt@...eblueprint.co.uk>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        "# 4 . 15 . x" <stable@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/efi: Access EFI MMIO data as unencrypted when SEV is active

On 17 July 2018 at 03:15, Brijesh Singh <brijesh.singh@....com> wrote:
> Hi Ard,
>
>
>
> On 07/11/2018 05:00 AM, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>>
>> On 3 July 2018 at 15:32, Brijesh Singh <brijesh.singh@....com> wrote:
>>>
>>> SEV guest fails to update the UEFI runtime variables stored in the
>>> flash. commit 1379edd59673 ("x86/efi: Access EFI data as encrypted
>>> when SEV is active") unconditionally maps all the UEFI runtime data
>>> as 'encrypted' (C=1). When SEV is active the UEFI runtime data marked
>>> as EFI_MEMORY_MAPPED_IO should be mapped as 'unencrypted' so that both
>>> guest and hypervisor can access the data.
>>>
>>> Fixes: 1379edd59673 (x86/efi: Access EFI data as encrypted ...)
>>> Cc: Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>
>>> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
>>> Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>
>>> Cc: linux-efi@...r.kernel.org
>>> Cc: kvm@...r.kernel.org
>>> Cc: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>
>>> Cc: Matt Fleming <matt@...eblueprint.co.uk>
>>> Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>
>>> Cc: <stable@...r.kernel.org> # 4.15.x
>>> Signed-off-by: Brijesh Singh <brijesh.singh@....com>
>>> ---
>>>   arch/x86/platform/efi/efi_64.c | 2 +-
>>>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/x86/platform/efi/efi_64.c
>>> b/arch/x86/platform/efi/efi_64.c
>>> index 77873ce..5f2eb32 100644
>>> --- a/arch/x86/platform/efi/efi_64.c
>>> +++ b/arch/x86/platform/efi/efi_64.c
>>> @@ -417,7 +417,7 @@ static void __init __map_region(efi_memory_desc_t
>>> *md, u64 va)
>>>          if (!(md->attribute & EFI_MEMORY_WB))
>>>                  flags |= _PAGE_PCD;
>>>
>>> -       if (sev_active())
>>> +       if (sev_active() && md->type != EFI_MEMORY_MAPPED_IO)
>>>                  flags |= _PAGE_ENC;
>>>
>>>          pfn = md->phys_addr >> PAGE_SHIFT;
>>
>>
>> Is it safe to only update this occurrence and not the one in
>> efi_runtime_update_mappings() ?
>>
>
>
> It's safe to update this occurrence only. The SEV support is added
> in recent EDK2 bios, and the version of bios provides the
> EFI_MEMORY_ATTRIBUTE_TABLE. Hence the efi_enabled(EFI_MEM_ATTR) check in
> efi_runtime_update_mappings() will always be true. When EFI_MEM_ATTR is
> set the code updates the mapping and returns (see below)
>
> void __init efi_runtime_update_mappings(void)
> {
>    .....
>    .....
>
>    /*
>     * Use the EFI Memory Attribute Table for mapping permissions if it
>     * exists, since it is intended to supersede EFI_PROPERTIES_TABLE.
>     */
>     if (efi_enabled(EFI_MEM_ATTR)) {
>         efi_memattr_apply_permissions(NULL, efi_update_mem_attr);
>         return;
>     }
>
>
>    ...
>
> }
>
> The EFI_MEMORY_ATTRIBUTE_TABLE table does not include MMIO regions, the
> table describes the memory protections to EFI runtime code and data
> regions only. Both EFI runtime code and data should be mapped as
> encrypted. Hence I skipped updating the efi_runtime_update_mappings().
>

Ok, thanks for clearing that up

Queued in efi/urgent