linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5] virtio-blk: Add validation for block size in config space

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: <20210823080952-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org>
Date:   Mon, 23 Aug 2021 08:13:34 -0400
From:   "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
To:     Max Gurtovoy <mgurtovoy@...dia.com>
Cc:     Yongji Xie <xieyongji@...edance.com>,
        Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>,
        Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@...hat.com>,
        virtualization <virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
        linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] virtio-blk: Add validation for block size in config
 space

On Mon, Aug 23, 2021 at 01:45:31PM +0300, Max Gurtovoy wrote:
> It helpful if there is a justification for this.
> 
> In this case, no such HW device exist and the only device that can cause
> this trouble today is user space VDUSE device that must be validated by the
> emulation VDUSE kernel driver.
> 
> Otherwise, will can create 1000 commit like this in the virtio level (for
> example for each feature for each virtio device).

Yea, it's a lot of work but I don't think it's avoidable.

> > 
> > > > > > And regardless of userspace device, we still need to fix it for other cases.
> > > > > which cases ? Do you know that there is a buggy HW we need to workaround ?
> > > > > 
> > > > No, there isn't now. But this could be a potential attack surface if
> > > > the host doesn't trust the device.
> > > If the host doesn't trust a device, why it continues using it ?
> > > 
> > IIUC this is the case for the encrypted VMs.
> 
> what do you mean encrypted VM ?
> 
> And how this small patch causes a VM to be 100% encryption supported ?
> 
> > > Do you suggest we do these workarounds in all device drivers in the kernel ?
> > > 
> > Isn't it the driver's job to validate some unreasonable configuration?
> 
> The check should be in different layer.
> 
> Virtio blk driver should not cover on some strange VDUSE stuff.

Yes I'm not convinced VDUSE is a valid use-case. I think that for
security and robustness it should validate data it gets from userspace
right there after reading it.
But I think this is useful for the virtio hardening thing.
https://lwn.net/Articles/865216/

Yongji - I think the commit log should be much more explicit that
this is hardening. Otherwise people get confused and think this
needs a CVE or a backport for security.

-- 
MST