From: Chuck Lever III <chuck.lever@oracle.com>
To: Simo Sorce <simo@redhat.com>
Cc: Boris Pismenny <borispismenny@gmail.com>,
Alexander Krizhanovsky <ak@tempesta-tech.com>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
CIFS <linux-cifs@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux NFS Mailing List <linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org" <linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org>,
netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 4/5] net/tls: Add support for PF_TLSH (a TLS handshake listener)
Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2022 15:19:33 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <7FA8327D-8D88-4BD3-B482-91FE673BC118@oracle.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <089628513e1cadc0d711874d9ed2e70bb689e3f1.camel@redhat.com>
> On Apr 28, 2022, at 9:12 AM, Simo Sorce <simo@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 2022-04-28 at 11:49 +0300, Boris Pismenny wrote:
>> On 18/04/2022 19:49, Chuck Lever wrote:
>>> In-kernel TLS consumers need a way to perform a TLS handshake. In
>>> the absence of a handshake implementation in the kernel itself, a
>>> mechanism to perform the handshake in user space, using an existing
>>> TLS handshake library, is necessary.
>>>
>>> I've designed a way to pass a connected kernel socket endpoint to
>>> user space using the traditional listen/accept mechanism. accept(2)
>>> gives us a well-understood way to materialize a socket endpoint as a
>>> normal file descriptor in a specific user space process. Like any
>>> open socket descriptor, the accepted FD can then be passed to a
>>> library such as openSSL to perform a TLS handshake.
>>>
>>> This prototype currently handles only initiating client-side TLS
>>> handshakes. Server-side handshakes and key renegotiation are left
>>> to do.
>>>
>>> Security Considerations
>>> ~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>>
>>> This prototype is net-namespace aware.
>>>
>>> The kernel has no mechanism to attest that the listening user space
>>> agent is trustworthy.
>>>
>>> Currently the prototype does not handle multiple listeners that
>>> overlap -- multiple listeners in the same net namespace that have
>>> overlapping bind addresses.
>>>
>>
>> Thanks for posting this. As we discussed offline, I think this approach
>> is more manageable compared to a full in-kernel TLS handshake. A while
>> ago, I've hacked around TLS to implement the data-path for NVMe-TLS and
>> the data-path is indeed very simple provided an infrastructure such as
>> this one.
>>
>> Making this more generic is desirable, and this obviously requires
>> supporting multiple listeners for multiple protocols (TLS, DTLS, QUIC,
>> PSP, etc.), which suggests that it will reside somewhere outside of net/tls.
>> Moreover, there is a need to support (TLS) control messages here too.
>> These will occasionally require going back to the userspace daemon
>> during kernel packet processing. A few examples are handling: TLS rekey,
>> TLS close_notify, and TLS keepalives. I'm not saying that we need to
>> support everything from day-1, but there needs to be a way to support these.
>>
>> A related kernel interface is the XFRM netlink where the kernel asks a
>> userspace daemon to perform an IKE handshake for establishing IPsec SAs.
>> This works well when the handshake runs on a different socket, perhaps
>> that interface can be extended to do handshakes on a given socket that
>> lives in the kernel without actually passing the fd to userespace. If we
>> avoid instantiating a full socket fd in userspace, then the need for an
>> accept(2) interface is reduced, right?
>
> JFYI:
> For in kernel NFSD hadnshakes we also use the gssproxy unix socket in
> the kernel, which allows GSSAPI handshakes to be relayed from the
> kernel to a user space listening daemon.
>
> The infrastructure is technically already available and could be
> reasonably simply extended to do TLS negotiations as well.
To fill in a little about our design thinking:
We chose not to use either gssproxy or gssd for the TLS handshake
prototype so that we don't add a dependency on RPC infrastructure
for other TLS consumers such as NVMe. Non-RPC consumers view that
kind of dependency as quite undesirable.
Also, neither of those existing mechanisms helped us address the
issue of passing a connected socket endpoint.
listen/poll/accept/close addresses that issue quite directly.
--
Chuck Lever
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-04-29 15:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 42+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-04-18 16:49 [PATCH RFC 0/5] Implement a TLS handshake upcall Chuck Lever
2022-04-18 16:49 ` [PATCH RFC 1/5] net: Add distinct sk_psock field Chuck Lever
2022-04-21 7:35 ` Hannes Reinecke
2022-07-13 4:46 ` Hawkins Jiawei
2022-04-18 16:49 ` [PATCH RFC 2/5] tls: build proto after context has been initialized Chuck Lever
2022-04-25 17:11 ` Jakub Kicinski
2022-04-25 17:51 ` Chuck Lever III
2022-05-20 16:39 ` Chuck Lever III
2022-04-18 16:49 ` [PATCH RFC 3/5] net/tls: Add an AF_TLSH address family Chuck Lever
2022-04-21 7:35 ` Hannes Reinecke
2022-04-18 16:49 ` [PATCH RFC 4/5] net/tls: Add support for PF_TLSH (a TLS handshake listener) Chuck Lever
2022-04-21 7:36 ` Hannes Reinecke
2022-04-25 17:14 ` Jakub Kicinski
2022-04-26 9:43 ` Hannes Reinecke
2022-04-26 14:29 ` Sagi Grimberg
2022-04-26 15:02 ` Jakub Kicinski
2022-04-26 15:58 ` Hannes Reinecke
2022-04-27 0:03 ` Jakub Kicinski
2022-04-27 15:24 ` Chuck Lever III
2022-04-28 7:26 ` Hannes Reinecke
2022-04-28 13:30 ` Jakub Kicinski
2022-04-28 13:51 ` Hannes Reinecke
2022-04-28 14:09 ` Benjamin Coddington
2022-04-28 21:08 ` Jakub Kicinski
2022-05-24 10:05 ` [ovs-dev] " Ilya Maximets
2022-04-26 14:55 ` Jakub Kicinski
2022-04-26 13:48 ` Chuck Lever III
2022-04-26 14:55 ` Jakub Kicinski
2022-04-26 15:58 ` Chuck Lever III
2022-04-26 23:47 ` Jakub Kicinski
2022-04-27 14:42 ` Chuck Lever III
2022-04-27 23:53 ` Jakub Kicinski
2022-04-28 1:29 ` Chuck Lever III
2022-04-28 21:08 ` Jakub Kicinski
2022-04-28 21:54 ` Chuck Lever III
2022-04-28 8:49 ` Boris Pismenny
2022-04-28 13:12 ` Simo Sorce
2022-04-29 15:19 ` Chuck Lever III [this message]
2022-04-28 15:24 ` Chuck Lever III
2022-04-29 6:25 ` Hannes Reinecke
2022-04-18 16:49 ` [PATCH RFC 5/5] net/tls: Add observability for AF_TLSH sockets Chuck Lever
2022-04-21 7:36 ` Hannes Reinecke
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=7FA8327D-8D88-4BD3-B482-91FE673BC118@oracle.com \
--to=chuck.lever@oracle.com \
--cc=ak@tempesta-tech.com \
--cc=borispismenny@gmail.com \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-cifs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=simo@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).