linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH, RFC 45/62] mm: Add the encrypt

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]

Message-ID: <1560824611.5187.100.camel@linux.intel.com>
Date:   Tue, 18 Jun 2019 14:23:31 +1200
From:   Kai Huang <kai.huang@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>
Cc:     Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
        "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@...ux.intel.com>,
        Alison Schofield <alison.schofield@...el.com>,
        Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>, kvm list <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
        keyrings@...r.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH, RFC 45/62] mm: Add the encrypt_mprotect() system call
 for MKTME

On Mon, 2019-06-17 at 18:43 -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 6:35 PM Kai Huang <kai.huang@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > I'm having a hard time imagining that ever working -- wouldn't it blow
> > > > > up if someone did:
> > > > > 
> > > > > fd = open("/dev/anything987");
> > > > > ptr1 = mmap(fd);
> > > > > ptr2 = mmap(fd);
> > > > > sys_encrypt(ptr1);
> > > > > 
> > > > > So I think it really has to be:
> > > > > fd = open("/dev/anything987");
> > > > > ioctl(fd, ENCRYPT_ME);
> > > > > mmap(fd);
> > > > 
> > > > This requires "/dev/anything987" to support ENCRYPT_ME ioctl, right?
> > > > 
> > > > So to support NVDIMM (DAX), we need to add ENCRYPT_ME ioctl to DAX?
> > > 
> > > Yes and yes, or we do it with layers -- see below.
> > > 
> > > I don't see how we can credibly avoid this.  If we try to do MKTME
> > > behind the DAX driver's back, aren't we going to end up with cache
> > > coherence problems?
> > 
> > I am not sure whether I understand correctly but how is cache coherence problem related to
> > putting
> > MKTME concept to different layers? To make MKTME work with DAX/NVDIMM, I think no matter which
> > layer
> > MKTME concept resides, eventually we need to put keyID into PTE which maps to NVDIMM, and kernel
> > needs to manage cache coherence for NVDIMM just like for normal memory showed in this series?
> > 
> 
> I mean is that, to avoid cache coherence problems, something has to
> prevent user code from mapping the same page with two different key
> ids.  If the entire MKTME mechanism purely layers on top of DAX,
> something needs to prevent the underlying DAX device from being mapped
> at the same time as the MKTME-decrypted view.  This is obviously
> doable, but it's not automatic.

Assuming I am understanding the context correctly, yes from this perspective it seems having
sys_encrypt is annoying, and having ENCRYPT_ME should be better. But Dave said "nobody is going to
do what you suggest in the ptr1/ptr2 example"? 

Thanks,
-Kai