linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3] x86/coco: Require seeding RNG with RDRAND on CoCo systems

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: Wed, 21 Feb 2024 16:36:02 +0100
From: "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@...c4.com>
To: x86@...nel.org, linux-coco@...ts.linux.dev, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, Daniel P . Berrangé <berrange@...hat.com>, 
	Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, Elena Reshetova <elena.reshetova@...el.com>, 
	"H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, 
	"Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>, "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>, 
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, stable <stable@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] x86/coco: Require seeding RNG with RDRAND on CoCo systems

On Wed, Feb 21, 2024 at 1:33 PM Jason A. Donenfeld <Jason@...c4.com> wrote:
>
> There are few uses of CoCo that don't rely on working cryptography and
> hence a working RNG. Unfortunately, the CoCo threat model means that the
> VM host cannot be trusted and may actively work against guests to
> extract secrets or manipulate computation. Since a malicious host can
> modify or observe nearly all inputs to guests, the only remaining source
> of entropy for CoCo guests is RDRAND.
>
> If RDRAND is broken -- due to CPU hardware fault -- the RNG as a whole
> is meant to gracefully continue on gathering entropy from other sources,
> but since there aren't other sources on CoCo, this is catastrophic.
> This is mostly a concern at boot time when initially seeding the RNG, as
> after that the consequences of a broken RDRAND are much more
> theoretical.
>
> So, try at boot to seed the RNG using 256 bits of RDRAND output. If this
> fails, panic(). This will also trigger if the system is booted without
> RDRAND, as RDRAND is essential for a safe CoCo boot.
>
> This patch is deliberately written to be "just a CoCo x86 driver
> feature" and not part of the RNG itself. Many device drivers and
> platforms have some desire to contribute something to the RNG, and
> add_device_randomness() is specifically meant for this purpose. Any
> driver can call this with seed data of any quality, or even garbage
> quality, and it can only possibly make the quality of the RNG better or
> have no effect, but can never make it worse. Rather than trying to
> build something into the core of the RNG, this patch interprets the
> particular CoCo issue as just a CoCo issue, and therefore separates this
> all out into driver (well, arch/platform) code.
>
> Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
> Cc: Daniel P. Berrangé <berrange@...hat.com>
> Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>
> Cc: Elena Reshetova <elena.reshetova@...el.com>
> Cc: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com>
> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>
> Cc: Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>
> Cc: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>
> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
> Signed-off-by: Jason A. Donenfeld <Jason@...c4.com>

Also,

Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org

At least, I think that's probably what we want, though I don't know
what version range is relevant for CoCo.