[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20201102154028.GD4879@kernel.org>
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2020 17:40:28 +0200
From: Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>
To: Hagen Paul Pfeifer <hagen@...u.net>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Christopher Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
Elena Reshetova <elena.reshetova@...el.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Idan Yaniv <idan.yaniv@....com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
James Bottomley <jejb@...ux.ibm.com>,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Mike Rapoport <rppt@...ux.ibm.com>,
Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@...il.com>,
Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>, Tycho Andersen <tycho@...ho.ws>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, linux-api@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org, linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org,
x86@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 0/6] mm: introduce memfd_secret system call to create
"secret" memory areas
On Sun, Nov 01, 2020 at 12:09:35PM +0100, Hagen Paul Pfeifer wrote:
> * Mike Rapoport | 2020-09-24 16:28:58 [+0300]:
>
> >This is an implementation of "secret" mappings backed by a file descriptor.
> >I've dropped the boot time reservation patch for now as it is not strictly
> >required for the basic usage and can be easily added later either with or
> >without CMA.
>
> Isn't memfd_secret currently *unnecessarily* designed to be a "one task
> feature"? memfd_secret fulfills exactly two (generic) features:
>
> - address space isolation from kernel (aka SECRET_EXCLUSIVE, not in kernel's
> direct map) - hide from kernel, great
> - disabling processor's memory caches against speculative-execution vulnerabilities
> (spectre and friends, aka SECRET_UNCACHED), also great
>
> But, what about the following use-case: implementing a hardened IPC mechanism
> where even the kernel is not aware of any data and optionally via SECRET_UNCACHED
> even the hardware caches are bypassed! With the patches we are so close to
> achieving this.
>
> How? Shared, SECRET_EXCLUSIVE and SECRET_UNCACHED mmaped pages for IPC
> involved tasks required to know this mapping (and memfd_secret fd). After IPC
> is done, tasks can copy sensitive data from IPC pages into memfd_secret()
> pages, un-sensitive data can be used/copied everywhere.
As long as the task share the file descriptor, they can share the
secretmem pages, pretty much like normal memfd.
> One missing piece is still the secure zeroization of the page(s) if the
> mapping is closed by last process to guarantee a secure cleanup. This can
> probably done as an general mmap feature, not coupled to memfd_secret() and
> can be done independently ("reverse" MAP_UNINITIALIZED feature).
There are "init_on_alloc" and "init_on_free" kernel parameters that
enable zeroing of the pages on alloc and on free globally.
Anyway, I'll add zeroing of the freed memory to secretmem.
> PS: thank you Mike for your effort!
>
> See the following pseudo-code as an example:
>
>
> // simple assume file-descriptor and mapping is inherited
> // by child for simplicity, ptr is
> int fd = memfd_secret(SECRETMEM_UNCACHED);
> ftruncate(fd, PAGE_SIZE);
> uint32_t *ptr = mmap(NULL, PAGE_SIZE, PROT_READ | PROT_WRITE, MAP_SHARED, fd, 0);
The ptr here will be visible to both parent and child.
> pid_t pid_other;
>
> void signal_handler(int sig)
> {
> // update IPC data on shared, uncachaed, exclusive mapped page
> *ptr += 1;
> // inform other
> sleep(1);
> kill(pid_other, SIGUSR1);
> }
>
> void ipc_loop(void)
> {
> signal(SIGUSR1, signal_handler);
> while (1) {
> sleep(1);
> }
> }
>
> int main(void)
> {
> pid_t child_pid;
>
> switch (child_pid = fork()) {
> case 0:
> pid_other = getppid();
> break;
> default:
> pid_other = child_pid
> break;
> }
>
> ipc_loop();
> }
>
>
> Hagen
>
--
Sincerely yours,
Mike.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists