linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v9 4/5] KVM: arm64: Add capability to advertise ptrauth for guest

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

Date:   Tue, 16 Apr 2019 17:32:12 +0100
From:   Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@....com>
To:     Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.kachhap@....com>
Cc:     linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
        Kristina Martsenko <kristina.martsenko@....com>,
        kvmarm@...ts.cs.columbia.edu,
        Ramana Radhakrishnan <ramana.radhakrishnan@....com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 4/5] KVM: arm64: Add capability to advertise ptrauth
 for guest

On Fri, Apr 12, 2019 at 08:50:35AM +0530, Amit Daniel Kachhap wrote:
> This patch advertises the capability of two cpu feature called address
> pointer authentication and generic pointer authentication. These
> capabilities depend upon system support for pointer authentication and
> VHE mode.
> 
> The current arm64 KVM partially implements pointer authentication and
> support of address/generic authentication are tied together. However,
> separate ABI requirements for both of them is added so that any future
> isolated implementation will not require any ABI changes.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.kachhap@....com>
> Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
> Cc: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>
> Cc: Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@....com>
> Cc: kvmarm@...ts.cs.columbia.edu
> ---
> Changes since v8:
> *  Keep the capability check same for the 2 vcpu ptrauth features. [Dave Martin]
> 
>  Documentation/virtual/kvm/api.txt | 2 ++
>  arch/arm64/kvm/reset.c            | 5 +++++
>  include/uapi/linux/kvm.h          | 2 ++
>  3 files changed, 9 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/virtual/kvm/api.txt b/Documentation/virtual/kvm/api.txt
> index 9d202f4..56021d0 100644
> --- a/Documentation/virtual/kvm/api.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/virtual/kvm/api.txt
> @@ -2756,9 +2756,11 @@ Possible features:
>  	- KVM_ARM_VCPU_PTRAUTH_ADDRESS: Enables Address Pointer authentication
>  	  for the CPU and supported only on arm64 architecture.
>  	  Must be requested if KVM_ARM_VCPU_PTRAUTH_GENERIC is also requested.
> +	  Depends on KVM_CAP_ARM_PTRAUTH_ADDRESS.

What if KVM_CAP_ARM_PTRAUTH_ADDRESS is absent and
KVM_ARM_VCPU_PTRAUTH_GENERIC is requested?  By these rules, we have a
contradiction: userspace both must request and must not request
KVM_ARM_VCPU_PTRAUTH_ADDRESS.

We could qualify as follows:

	Depends on KVM_CAP_ARM_PTRAUTH_ADDRESS.
	Must be requested if KVM_CAP_ARM_PTRAUTH_ADDRESS is present and
	KVM_ARM_VCPU_PTRAUTH_GENERIC is also requested.

>  	- KVM_ARM_VCPU_PTRAUTH_GENERIC: Enables Generic Pointer authentication
>  	  for the CPU and supported only on arm64 architecture.
>  	  Must be requested if KVM_ARM_VCPU_PTRAUTH_ADDRESS is also requested.
> +	  Depends on KVM_CAP_ARM_PTRAUTH_GENERIC.

Similarly.

Or, we go back to having a single cap and a single feature, and add
more caps/features later on if we decide it's possible to support
address/generic auth separately later on.

Otherwise, we end up with complex rules that can't be tested.  This is a
high price to pay for forwards compatibility: userspace's conformance to
the rules can't be fully tested, so there's a fair chance it won't work
properly anyway when hardware/KVM with just one auth type appears.

[...]

Thoughts?

Cheers
---Dave