All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
To: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>
Cc: "Kevin Wolf" <kwolf@redhat.com>,
	"Stefano Stabellini" <sstabellini@kernel.org>,
	"Daniel P. Berrangé" <berrange@redhat.com>,
	"Prasad J Pandit" <pjp@fedoraproject.org>,
	"QEMU Developers" <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>,
	"Christian Schoenebeck" <qemu_oss@crudebyte.com>,
	"Michael Roth" <mdroth@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	"P J P" <ppandit@redhat.com>, "Greg Kurz" <groug@kaod.org>,
	"Stefan Hajnoczi" <stefanha@redhat.com>,
	"Paolo Bonzini" <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] MAINTAINERS: introduce cve or security quotient field
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2020 07:02:59 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200714064921-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAFEAcA_ca4JN655GW=eGyjrjDmiv0EktaZZ7RMghO5rBwm9tGQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 11:22:28AM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Jul 2020 at 11:12, Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com> wrote:
> > And for people who want to build QEMU with lots of functionality (like
> > Fedora does), I think a -security flag would be a useful addition.
> > We can then tell security researchers "only a high security issue
> > if it reproduces with -security=high, only a security issue
> > if it reproduces with -security=low".
> 
> I think a -security option would also be useful to users -- it
> makes it easier for them to check "is this configuration using
> something that I didn't realize was not intended to be secure".
> For me, something useful for our users is much more compelling
> than "this might make security researchers' lives a bit easier".
> 
> thanks
> -- PMM

True. And I guess downstreams can also force the option to high or set the
default to high rather easily if they want to.

So the option would be:

-security level
	Set minimal required security level of QEMU.

	high: block use of QEMU functionality which is intended to be secure against
		malicious guests.
	low: allow use of all QEMU functionality, best effort security
		against malicious guests.

Default would be -security low.

Does this look reasonable?

Just a correction to what I wrote: I no longer think it's reasonable to
classify the severity of a security issue automatically. E.g. a qemu
crash in virtio code is a high severity security issue if it triggers
with platform_iommu=on since it is then driver from guest userspace, and
low severity one without since then it's driven from a guest driver.

So I think we can add something like this to security.rst and to
the wiki:

	only a security issue if it
	reproduces with -security high, a regular bug if it only reproduces with
	-security low

Prasad?

-- 
MST



  reply	other threads:[~2020-07-14 11:04 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-07-14  8:36 [PATCH 0/1] MAINTAINERS: add security quotient field P J P
2020-07-14  8:36 ` [PATCH 1/1] MAINTAINERS: introduce cve or " P J P
2020-07-14  9:42   ` Peter Maydell
2020-07-14  9:52     ` Daniel P. Berrangé
2020-07-14 10:12       ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2020-07-14 10:22         ` Peter Maydell
2020-07-14 11:02           ` Michael S. Tsirkin [this message]
2020-07-14 13:10             ` P J P
2020-07-16  6:55               ` Cornelia Huck
2020-07-16  8:36                 ` Daniel P. Berrangé
2020-07-16  9:21                   ` P J P
2020-07-16  9:39                     ` Daniel P. Berrangé
2020-07-16  9:45                     ` Christian Schoenebeck
2020-07-16 10:01                       ` Daniel P. Berrangé
2020-07-16 12:22                         ` Christian Schoenebeck
2020-07-16 12:54                           ` Daniel P. Berrangé
2020-07-14 13:30             ` Daniel P. Berrangé
2020-07-14 13:48               ` Kevin Wolf
2020-07-14 13:56                 ` Thomas Huth
2020-07-14 15:04                   ` Christian Schoenebeck
2020-07-14 14:02                 ` Daniel P. Berrangé
2020-07-14 10:18   ` Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
2020-07-14 11:51   ` Cornelia Huck
2020-07-16  8:56   ` Dr. David Alan Gilbert
2020-07-16  9:44     ` P J P
2020-07-16 10:09       ` Daniel P. Berrangé
2020-07-16 10:43         ` Markus Armbruster
2020-07-14  9:46 ` [PATCH 0/1] MAINTAINERS: add " Michael S. Tsirkin

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20200714064921-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org \
    --to=mst@redhat.com \
    --cc=berrange@redhat.com \
    --cc=groug@kaod.org \
    --cc=kwolf@redhat.com \
    --cc=mdroth@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=peter.maydell@linaro.org \
    --cc=pjp@fedoraproject.org \
    --cc=ppandit@redhat.com \
    --cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
    --cc=qemu_oss@crudebyte.com \
    --cc=sstabellini@kernel.org \
    --cc=stefanha@redhat.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.