KVM Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / Atom feed
From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>
Cc: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
	Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
	Kai Huang <kai.huang@linux.intel.com>,
	Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com>,
	Alison Schofield <alison.schofield@intel.com>,
	Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>, kvm list <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
	keyrings@vger.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH, RFC 45/62] mm: Add the encrypt_mprotect() system call for MKTME
Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2019 14:36:54 -0700
Message-ID: <d599b1d7-9455-3012-0115-96ddbad31833@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CALCETrWFXSndmPH0OH4DVVrAyPEeKUUfNwo_9CxO-3xy9awq0g@mail.gmail.com>

>> Where if we have something like mprotect() (or madvise() or something
>> else taking pointer), we can just do:
>>
>>         fd = open("/dev/anything987");
>>         ptr = mmap(fd);
>>         sys_encrypt(ptr);
> 
> I'm having a hard time imagining that ever working -- wouldn't it blow
> up if someone did:
> 
> fd = open("/dev/anything987");
> ptr1 = mmap(fd);
> ptr2 = mmap(fd);
> sys_encrypt(ptr1);
> 
> So I think it really has to be:
> fd = open("/dev/anything987");
> ioctl(fd, ENCRYPT_ME);
> mmap(fd);

Yeah, shared mappings are annoying. :)

But, let's face it, nobody is going to do what you suggest in the
ptr1/ptr2 example.  It doesn't make any logical sense because it's
effectively asking to read the memory with two different keys.  I
_believe_ fscrypt has similar issues and just punts on them by saying
"don't do that".

We can also quite easily figure out what's going on.  It's a very simple
rule to kill a process that tries to fault a page in whose KeyID doesn't
match the VMA under which it is faulted in, and also require that no
pages are faulted in under VMAs which have their key changed.


>> Now, we might not *do* it that way for dax, for instance, but I'm just
>> saying that if we go the /dev/mktme route, we never get a choice.
>>
>>> I think that, in the long run, we're going to have to either expand
>>> the core mm's concept of what "memory" is or just have a whole
>>> parallel set of mechanisms for memory that doesn't work like memory.
>> ...
>>> I expect that some day normal memory will  be able to be repurposed as
>>> SGX pages on the fly, and that will also look a lot more like SEV or
>>> XPFO than like the this model of MKTME.
>>
>> I think you're drawing the line at pages where the kernel can manage
>> contents vs. not manage contents.  I'm not sure that's the right
>> distinction to make, though.  The thing that is important is whether the
>> kernel can manage the lifetime and location of the data in the page.
> 
> The kernel can manage the location of EPC pages, for example, but only
> under extreme constraints right now.  The draft SGX driver can and
> does swap them out and swap them back in, potentially at a different
> address.

The kernel can't put arbitrary data in EPC pages and can't use normal
memory for EPC.  To me, that puts them clearly on the side of being
unmanageable by the core mm code.

For instance, there's no way we could mix EPC pages in the same 'struct
zone' with non-EPC pages.  Not only are they not in the direct map, but
they never *can* be, even for a second.

>>> And, one of these days, someone will come up with a version of XPFO
>>> that could actually be upstreamed, and it seems entirely plausible
>>> that it will be totally incompatible with MKTME-as-anonymous-memory
>>> and that users of MKTME will actually get *worse* security.
>>
>> I'm not following here.  XPFO just means that we don't keep the direct
>> map around all the time for all memory.  If XPFO and
>> MKTME-as-anonymous-memory were both in play, I think we'd just be
>> creating/destroying the MKTME-enlightened direct map instead of a
>> vanilla one.
> 
> What I'm saying is that I can imagine XPFO also wanting to be
> something other than anonymous memory.  I don't think we'll ever want
> regular MAP_ANONYMOUS to enable XPFO by default because the
> performance will suck.

It will certainly suck for some things.  But, does it suck if the kernel
never uses the direct map for the XPFO memory?  If it were for KVM guest
memory for a guest using direct device assignment, we might not even
ever notice.

> I'm thinking that XPFO is a *lot* simpler under the hood if we just
> straight-up don't support GUP on it.  Maybe we should call this
> "strong XPFO".  Similarly, the kinds of things that want MKTME may
> also want the memory to be entirely absent from the direct map.  And
> the things that use SEV (as I understand it) *can't* usefully use the
> memory for normal IO via GUP or copy_to/from_user(), so these things
> all have a decent amount in common.

OK, so basically, you're thinking about new memory management
infrastructure that a memory-allocating-app can opt into where they get
a reduced kernel feature set, but also increased security guarantees?
 The main insight thought is that some hardware features *already*
impose (some of) this reduced feature set?

FWIW, I don't think many folks will go for the no-GUP rule.  It's one
thing to say no-GUPs for SGX pages which can't have I/O done on them in
the first place, but it's quite another to tell folks that sendfile() no
longer works without bounce buffers.

MKTME's security guarantees are very different than something like SEV.
 Since the kernel is in the trust boundary, it *can* do fun stuff like
RDMA which is a heck of a lot faster than bounce buffering.  Let's say a
franken-system existed with SEV and MKTME.  It isn't even clear to me
that *everyone* would pick SEV over MKTME.  IOW, I'm not sure the MKTME
model necessarily goes away given the presence of SEV.

> And another silly argument: if we had /dev/mktme, then we could
> possibly get away with avoiding all the keyring stuff entirely.
> Instead, you open /dev/mktme and you get your own key under the hook.
> If you want two keys, you open /dev/mktme twice.  If you want some
> other program to be able to see your memory, you pass it the fd.

We still like the keyring because it's one-stop-shopping as the place
that *owns* the hardware KeyID slots.  Those are global resources and
scream for a single global place to allocate and manage them.  The
hardware slots also need to be shared between any anonymous and
file-based users, no matter what the APIs for the anonymous side.

  reply index

Thread overview: 153+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-05-08 14:43 [PATCH, RFC 00/62] Intel MKTME enabling Kirill A. Shutemov
2019-05-08 14:43 ` [PATCH, RFC 01/62] mm: Do no merge VMAs with different encryption KeyIDs Kirill A. Shutemov
2019-05-08 14:43 ` [PATCH, RFC 02/62] mm: Add helpers to setup zero page mappings Kirill A. Shutemov
2019-05-29  7:21   ` Mike Rapoport
2019-05-08 14:43 ` [PATCH, RFC 03/62] mm/ksm: Do not merge pages with different KeyIDs Kirill A. Shutemov
2019-05-10 18:07   ` Dave Hansen
2019-05-13 14:27     ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2019-05-08 14:43 ` [PATCH, RFC 04/62] mm/page_alloc: Unify alloc_hugepage_vma() Kirill A. Shutemov
2019-05-08 14:43 ` [PATCH, RFC 05/62] mm/page_alloc: Handle allocation for encrypted memory Kirill A. Shutemov
2019-05-29  7:21   ` Mike Rapoport
2019-05-29 12:47     ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2019-05-08 14:43 ` [PATCH, RFC 06/62] mm/khugepaged: Handle encrypted pages Kirill A. Shutemov
2019-05-08 14:43 ` [PATCH, RFC 07/62] x86/mm: Mask out KeyID bits from page table entry pfn Kirill A. Shutemov
2019-05-08 14:43 ` [PATCH, RFC 08/62] x86/mm: Introduce variables to store number, shift and mask of KeyIDs Kirill A. Shutemov
2019-05-08 14:43 ` [PATCH, RFC 09/62] x86/mm: Preserve KeyID on pte_modify() and pgprot_modify() Kirill A. Shutemov
2019-06-14  9:15   ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-06-14 13:03     ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2019-05-08 14:43 ` [PATCH, RFC 10/62] x86/mm: Detect MKTME early Kirill A. Shutemov
2019-05-08 14:43 ` [PATCH, RFC 11/62] x86/mm: Add a helper to retrieve KeyID for a page Kirill A. Shutemov
2019-05-08 14:43 ` [PATCH, RFC 12/62] x86/mm: Add a helper to retrieve KeyID for a VMA Kirill A. Shutemov
2019-05-08 14:43 ` [PATCH, RFC 13/62] x86/mm: Add hooks to allocate and free encrypted pages Kirill A. Shutemov
2019-06-14  9:34   ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-06-14 11:04     ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-06-14 13:28       ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2019-06-14 13:43         ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-06-14 22:41           ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2019-06-17  9:25             ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-06-14 13:14     ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2019-05-08 14:43 ` [PATCH, RFC 14/62] x86/mm: Map zero pages into encrypted mappings correctly Kirill A. Shutemov
2019-05-08 14:43 ` [PATCH, RFC 15/62] x86/mm: Rename CONFIG_RANDOMIZE_MEMORY_PHYSICAL_PADDING Kirill A. Shutemov
2019-05-08 14:43 ` [PATCH, RFC 16/62] x86/mm: Allow to disable MKTME after enumeration Kirill A. Shutemov
2019-05-08 14:43 ` [PATCH, RFC 17/62] x86/mm: Calculate direct mapping size Kirill A. Shutemov
2019-05-08 14:43 ` [PATCH, RFC 18/62] x86/mm: Implement syncing per-KeyID direct mappings Kirill A. Shutemov
2019-06-14  9:51   ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-06-14 22:43     ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2019-06-17  9:27       ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-06-17 14:43         ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2019-06-17 14:51           ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-06-17 15:17             ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2019-05-08 14:43 ` [PATCH, RFC 19/62] x86/mm: Handle encrypted memory in page_to_virt() and __pa() Kirill A. Shutemov
2019-06-14 11:10   ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-05-08 14:43 ` [PATCH, RFC 20/62] mm/page_ext: Export lookup_page_ext() symbol Kirill A. Shutemov
2019-06-14 11:12   ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-06-14 22:44     ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2019-06-17  9:30       ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-06-17 11:01         ` Kai Huang
2019-06-17 11:13           ` Huang, Kai
2019-05-08 14:43 ` [PATCH, RFC 21/62] mm/rmap: Clear vma->anon_vma on unlink_anon_vmas() Kirill A. Shutemov
2019-05-08 14:43 ` [PATCH, RFC 22/62] x86/pconfig: Set a valid encryption algorithm for all MKTME commands Kirill A. Shutemov
2019-05-08 14:43 ` [PATCH, RFC 23/62] keys/mktme: Introduce a Kernel Key Service for MKTME Kirill A. Shutemov
2019-05-08 14:43 ` [PATCH, RFC 24/62] keys/mktme: Preparse the MKTME key payload Kirill A. Shutemov
2019-05-08 14:43 ` [PATCH, RFC 25/62] keys/mktme: Instantiate and destroy MKTME keys Kirill A. Shutemov
2019-05-08 14:43 ` [PATCH, RFC 26/62] keys/mktme: Move the MKTME payload into a cache aligned structure Kirill A. Shutemov
2019-06-14 11:35   ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-06-14 17:10     ` Alison Schofield
2019-05-08 14:43 ` [PATCH, RFC 27/62] keys/mktme: Strengthen the entropy of CPU generated MKTME keys Kirill A. Shutemov
2019-05-08 14:43 ` [PATCH, RFC 28/62] keys/mktme: Set up PCONFIG programming targets for " Kirill A. Shutemov
2019-05-08 14:43 ` [PATCH, RFC 29/62] keys/mktme: Program MKTME keys into the platform hardware Kirill A. Shutemov
2019-05-08 14:43 ` [PATCH, RFC 30/62] keys/mktme: Set up a percpu_ref_count for MKTME keys Kirill A. Shutemov
2019-05-08 14:43 ` [PATCH, RFC 31/62] keys/mktme: Require CAP_SYS_RESOURCE capability " Kirill A. Shutemov
2019-05-08 14:43 ` [PATCH, RFC 32/62] keys/mktme: Store MKTME payloads if cmdline parameter allows Kirill A. Shutemov
2019-05-08 14:43 ` [PATCH, RFC 33/62] acpi: Remove __init from acpi table parsing functions Kirill A. Shutemov
2019-05-08 14:43 ` [PATCH, RFC 34/62] acpi/hmat: Determine existence of an ACPI HMAT Kirill A. Shutemov
2019-05-08 14:43 ` [PATCH, RFC 35/62] keys/mktme: Require ACPI HMAT to register the MKTME Key Service Kirill A. Shutemov
2019-05-08 14:43 ` [PATCH, RFC 36/62] acpi/hmat: Evaluate topology presented in ACPI HMAT for MKTME Kirill A. Shutemov
2019-05-08 14:43 ` [PATCH, RFC 37/62] keys/mktme: Do not allow key creation in unsafe topologies Kirill A. Shutemov
2019-05-08 14:43 ` [PATCH, RFC 38/62] keys/mktme: Support CPU hotplug for MKTME key service Kirill A. Shutemov
2019-05-08 14:43 ` [PATCH, RFC 39/62] keys/mktme: Find new PCONFIG targets during memory hotplug Kirill A. Shutemov
2019-05-08 14:44 ` [PATCH, RFC 40/62] keys/mktme: Program new PCONFIG targets with MKTME keys Kirill A. Shutemov
2019-05-08 14:44 ` [PATCH, RFC 41/62] keys/mktme: Support memory hotplug for " Kirill A. Shutemov
2019-05-08 14:44 ` [PATCH, RFC 42/62] mm: Generalize the mprotect implementation to support extensions Kirill A. Shutemov
2019-05-08 14:44 ` [PATCH, RFC 43/62] syscall/x86: Wire up a system call for MKTME encryption keys Kirill A. Shutemov
2019-05-29  7:21   ` Mike Rapoport
2019-05-29 18:12     ` Alison Schofield
2019-05-08 14:44 ` [PATCH, RFC 44/62] x86/mm: Set KeyIDs in encrypted VMAs for MKTME Kirill A. Shutemov
2019-06-14 11:44   ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-06-14 17:33     ` Alison Schofield
2019-06-14 18:26       ` Dave Hansen
2019-06-14 18:46         ` Alison Schofield
2019-06-14 19:11           ` Dave Hansen
2019-06-17  9:10             ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-05-08 14:44 ` [PATCH, RFC 45/62] mm: Add the encrypt_mprotect() system call " Kirill A. Shutemov
2019-06-14 11:47   ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-06-14 17:35     ` Alison Schofield
2019-06-14 11:51   ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-06-15  0:32     ` Alison Schofield
2019-06-17  9:08       ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-06-17 15:07   ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-06-17 15:28     ` Dave Hansen
2019-06-17 15:46       ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-06-17 18:27         ` Dave Hansen
2019-06-17 19:12           ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-06-17 21:36             ` Dave Hansen [this message]
2019-06-18  0:48               ` Kai Huang
2019-06-18  1:50                 ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-06-18  2:11                   ` Kai Huang
2019-06-18  4:24                     ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-06-18 14:19                   ` Dave Hansen
2019-06-18  0:05             ` Kai Huang
2019-06-18  0:15               ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-06-18  1:35                 ` Kai Huang
2019-06-18  1:43                   ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-06-18  2:23                     ` Kai Huang
2019-06-18  9:12                       ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-06-18 14:09                         ` Dave Hansen
2019-06-18 16:15                           ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2019-06-18 16:22                             ` Dave Hansen
2019-06-18 16:36                               ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-06-18 16:48                                 ` Dave Hansen
2019-06-18 14:13                 ` Dave Hansen
2019-06-17 23:59           ` Kai Huang
2019-06-18  1:34             ` Lendacky, Thomas
2019-06-18  1:40               ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-06-18  2:02                 ` Lendacky, Thomas
2019-06-18  4:19                 ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-05-08 14:44 ` [PATCH, RFC 46/62] x86/mm: Keep reference counts on encrypted VMAs " Kirill A. Shutemov
2019-06-14 11:54   ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-06-14 18:39     ` Alison Schofield
2019-05-08 14:44 ` [PATCH, RFC 47/62] mm: Restrict MKTME memory encryption to anonymous VMAs Kirill A. Shutemov
2019-06-14 11:55   ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-06-15  0:07     ` Alison Schofield
2019-05-08 14:44 ` [PATCH, RFC 48/62] selftests/x86/mktme: Test the MKTME APIs Kirill A. Shutemov
2019-05-08 17:09   ` Alison Schofield
2019-05-08 14:44 ` [PATCH, RFC 49/62] mm, x86: export several MKTME variables Kirill A. Shutemov
2019-06-14 11:56   ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-06-17  3:14     ` Kai Huang
2019-06-17  7:46       ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-06-17  8:39         ` Kai Huang
2019-06-17 11:25           ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2019-05-08 14:44 ` [PATCH, RFC 50/62] kvm, x86, mmu: setup MKTME keyID to spte for given PFN Kirill A. Shutemov
2019-05-08 14:44 ` [PATCH, RFC 51/62] iommu/vt-d: Support MKTME in DMA remapping Kirill A. Shutemov
2019-06-14 12:04   ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-05-08 14:44 ` [PATCH, RFC 52/62] x86/mm: introduce common code for mem encryption Kirill A. Shutemov
2019-05-08 16:58   ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-05-08 20:52     ` Jacob Pan
2019-05-08 21:21       ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2019-05-08 14:44 ` [PATCH, RFC 53/62] x86/mm: Use common code for DMA memory encryption Kirill A. Shutemov
2019-05-08 14:44 ` [PATCH, RFC 54/62] x86/mm: Disable MKTME on incompatible platform configurations Kirill A. Shutemov
2019-05-08 14:44 ` [PATCH, RFC 55/62] x86/mm: Disable MKTME if not all system memory supports encryption Kirill A. Shutemov
2019-05-08 14:44 ` [PATCH, RFC 56/62] x86: Introduce CONFIG_X86_INTEL_MKTME Kirill A. Shutemov
2019-05-08 14:44 ` [PATCH, RFC 57/62] x86/mktme: Overview of Multi-Key Total Memory Encryption Kirill A. Shutemov
2019-05-29  7:21   ` Mike Rapoport
2019-05-29 18:13     ` Alison Schofield
2019-07-14 18:16   ` Randy Dunlap
2019-07-15  9:02     ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2019-05-08 14:44 ` [PATCH, RFC 58/62] x86/mktme: Document the MKTME provided security mitigations Kirill A. Shutemov
2019-05-08 14:44 ` [PATCH, RFC 59/62] x86/mktme: Document the MKTME kernel configuration requirements Kirill A. Shutemov
2019-05-08 14:44 ` [PATCH, RFC 60/62] x86/mktme: Document the MKTME Key Service API Kirill A. Shutemov
2019-05-08 14:44 ` [PATCH, RFC 61/62] x86/mktme: Document the MKTME API for anonymous memory encryption Kirill A. Shutemov
2019-05-08 14:44 ` [PATCH, RFC 62/62] x86/mktme: Demonstration program using the MKTME APIs Kirill A. Shutemov
2019-05-29  7:30 ` [PATCH, RFC 00/62] Intel MKTME enabling Mike Rapoport
2019-05-29 18:20   ` Alison Schofield
2019-06-14 12:15 ` Peter Zijlstra

Reply instructions:

You may reply publically 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=d599b1d7-9455-3012-0115-96ddbad31833@intel.com \
    --to=dave.hansen@intel.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=alison.schofield@intel.com \
    --cc=bp@alien8.de \
    --cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=kai.huang@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=keescook@chromium.org \
    --cc=keyrings@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=luto@kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=thomas.lendacky@amd.com \
    --cc=x86@kernel.org \
    /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

KVM Archive on lore.kernel.org

Archives are clonable:
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/kvm/0 kvm/git/0.git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V2 kvm kvm/ https://lore.kernel.org/kvm \
		kvm@vger.kernel.org
	public-inbox-index kvm

Example config snippet for mirrors

Newsgroup available over NNTP:
	nntp://nntp.lore.kernel.org/org.kernel.vger.kvm


AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/public-inbox.git