linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V4 00/31] x86/sgx and selftests/sgx: Support SGX2

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:   Fri, 22 Apr 2022 12:16:19 +0300
From:   Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@...nel.org>
To:     Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@...el.com>
Cc:     "Dhanraj, Vijay" <vijay.dhanraj@...el.com>,
        "dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com" <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        "tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        "bp@...en8.de" <bp@...en8.de>,
        "Lutomirski, Andy" <luto@...nel.org>,
        "mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
        "linux-sgx@...r.kernel.org" <linux-sgx@...r.kernel.org>,
        "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
        "shuah@...nel.org" <shuah@...nel.org>,
        "linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Shanahan, Mark" <mark.shanahan@...el.com>,
        "Christopherson,, Sean" <seanjc@...gle.com>,
        "Huang, Kai" <kai.huang@...el.com>,
        "Zhang, Cathy" <cathy.zhang@...el.com>,
        "Xing, Cedric" <cedric.xing@...el.com>,
        "Huang, Haitao" <haitao.huang@...el.com>,
        "hpa@...or.com" <hpa@...or.com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 00/31] x86/sgx and selftests/sgx: Support SGX2

On Thu, Apr 21, 2022 at 08:29:31PM -0700, Reinette Chatre wrote:
> Hi Vijay and Mark,
> 
> On 4/21/2022 4:46 PM, Dhanraj, Vijay wrote:
> > Hi All,
> > 
> > I evaluated V4 patch changes with Gramine and ran into an issue when trying to set EPC page permission to PROT_NONE. It looks like with V3 patch series a change was introduced which requires kernel to have at least R permission when calling RESTRICT IOCTL. This change was done under the assumption that EPCM requires at least R permission for EMODPE/EACCEPT to succeed. But when testing with V2 version, EACCEPT worked fine with page permission set to PROT_NONE. 
> > 
> > Thanks to @Shanahan, Mark for confirming that EPCM does not need to have R value to allow EACCEPT or EMODPE. Given this, can we please revert this change?
> > 
> 
> Thank you very much for pointing this out. I can revert the change
> to what was done in V2 where the only check is to ensure that W requires R.
> This is a requirement of EMODPR. Could you please check if this snippet
> results in things working for you again?
> 
> ---8<---
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/ioctl.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/ioctl.c
> index 83674d054c13..7c7c8a61196e 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/ioctl.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/ioctl.c
> @@ -855,12 +855,8 @@ static long sgx_ioc_enclave_restrict_permissions(struct sgx_encl *encl,
>  	if (params.permissions & ~SGX_SECINFO_PERMISSION_MASK)
>  		return -EINVAL;
>  
> -	/*
> -	 * Read access is required for the enclave to be able to use the page.
> -	 * SGX instructions like ENCLU[EMODPE] and ENCLU[EACCEPT] require
> -	 * read access.
> -	 */
> -	if (!(params.permissions & SGX_SECINFO_R))
> +	if ((params.permissions & SGX_SECINFO_W) &&
> +	    !(params.permissions & SGX_SECINFO_R))
>  		return -EINVAL;
>  
>  	if (params.result || params.count)

Just adding that it's fine for me to revert this.

BR, Jarkko