From: "Reshetova, Elena" <elena.reshetova@intel.com>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>, Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>
Cc: Eric Biggers <ebiggers3@gmail.com>,
"ebiggers@google.com" <ebiggers@google.com>,
"herbert@gondor.apana.org.au" <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>,
David Laight <David.Laight@aculab.com>,
"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
"keescook@chromium.org" <keescook@chromium.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
"luto@kernel.org" <luto@kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"jpoimboe@redhat.com" <jpoimboe@redhat.com>,
"jannh@google.com" <jannh@google.com>,
"Perla, Enrico" <enrico.perla@intel.com>,
"mingo@redhat.com" <mingo@redhat.com>,
"bp@alien8.de" <bp@alien8.de>,
"tglx@linutronix.de" <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"gregkh@linuxfoundation.org" <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
"Edgecombe, Rick P" <rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] x86/entry/64: randomize kernel stack offset upon syscall
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2019 07:46:41 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2236FBA76BA1254E88B949DDB74E612BA4C66A8A@IRSMSX102.ger.corp.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <57357E35-3D9B-4CA7-BAB9-0BE89E0094D2@amacapital.net>
> > On Apr 26, 2019, at 7:01 AM, Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu> wrote:
> >
> >> On Fri, Apr 26, 2019 at 11:33:09AM +0000, Reshetova, Elena wrote:
> >> Adding Eric and Herbert to continue discussion for the chacha part.
> >> So, as a short summary I am trying to find out a fast (fast enough to be used per
> syscall
> >> invocation) source of random bits with good enough security properties.
> >> I started to look into chacha kernel implementation and while it seems that it is
> designed to
> >> work with any number of rounds, it does not expose less than 12 rounds primitive.
> >> I guess this is done for security sake, since 12 is probably the lowest bound we
> want people
> >> to use for the purpose of encryption/decryption, but if we are to build an efficient
> RNG,
> >> chacha8 probably is a good tradeoff between security and speed.
> >>
> >> What are people's opinions/perceptions on this? Has it been considered before to
> create a
> >> kernel RNG based on chacha?
> >
> > Well, sure. The get_random_bytes() kernel interface and the
> > getrandom(2) system call uses a CRNG based on chacha20. See
> > extract_crng() and crng_reseed() in drivers/char/random.c.
> >
> > It *is* possible to use an arbitrary number of rounds if you use the
> > low level interface exposed as chacha_block(), which is an
> > EXPORT_SYMBOL interface so even modules can use it. "Does not expose
> > less than 12 rounds" applies only if you are using the high-level
> > crypto interface.
> >
> > We have used cut down crypto algorithms for performance critical
> > applications before; at one point, we were using a cut down MD4(!) for
> > initial TCP sequence number generation. But that was getting rekeyed
> > every five minutes, and the goal was to make it just hard enough that
> > there were other easier ways of DOS attacking a server.
> >
> > I'm not a cryptographer, so I'd really us to hear from multiple
> > experts about the security level of, say, ChaCha8 so we understand
> > exactly kind of security we'd offering. And I'd want that interface
> > to be named so that it's clear it's only intended for a very specific
> > use case, since it will be tempting for other kernel developers to use
> > it in other contexts, with undue consideration.
> >
> >
>
> I don’t understand why we’re even considering weaker primitives.
I guess one reasoning here was that cryptographic primitives are expensive performance-wise
and we are not really have a full crypto use case here with all standard requirements
for CRNG, such as reconstructing earlier inputs, etc. So, it was a natural wish to try to find smth
cheaper that does the job, but if we can make performance reasonable, I am all for the
proper primitives.
>It seems to me
> that we should be using the “fast-erasure” construction for all get_random_bytes()
> invocations. Specifically, we should have a per cpu buffer that stores some random
> bytes and a count of how many random bytes there are. get_random_bytes() should
> take bytes from that buffer and *immediately* zero those bytes in memory. When
> the buffer is empty, it gets refilled with the full strength CRNG.
Ideally it would be great to call smth fast and secure on each syscall without a per-cpu
buffer, so that's why I was asking on chacha8. As Eric pointed it should not be used for
cryptographic purpose, but I think it is reasonably secure for our purpose, especially if
the generator is sometimes reseeded with fresh entropy.
However, it very well might be that is too slow anyway.
So, I think then we can do the per-cpu approach as you suggesting.
Have a per-cpu buffer big enough as you suggested (couple of pages) from where
we regularly read 8 bits at the time and zero them as we go.
I am just not sure on the right refill strategy in this case?
Should we try to maintain this per-cpu buffer always with some random bytes by
having a work queued that would refill it (or part of it, i.e. a page from a set of 4 pages)
regularly from CRNG source?
I guess how often we need to refill will depend so much on the syscall rate
on that cpu, so it might be hard to find a reasonable period.
In any case we need to prepare to do a refill straight from a syscall,
if despite our best efforts to keep the buffer refilled we run out of bits.
Is it ok to get a visible performance hit at this point? In worse case we will need to
generate n pages worth of random numbers, which is going to take a
while.
I will try doing this PoC and measure implications (without the worker
refill to start with). Let's see how bad (performance wise it looks).
Best Regards,
Elena.
> The obvious objection is “oh no, a side channel could leak the buffer,” to which I say
> so what? A side channel could just as easily leak the entire CRNG state.
>
> For Elena’s specific use case, we would probably want a
> try_get_random_bytes_notrace() that *only* tries the percpu buffer, since this code
> runs so early in the syscall path that we can’t run real C code. Or it could be moved a
> bit later, I suppose — the really early part is not really an interesting attack surface.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-04-29 7:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 81+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-04-15 6:09 [PATCH] x86/entry/64: randomize kernel stack offset upon syscall Elena Reshetova
2019-04-15 7:25 ` Ingo Molnar
2019-04-15 8:44 ` Reshetova, Elena
2019-04-16 7:34 ` Ingo Molnar
2019-04-16 11:10 ` Reshetova, Elena
2019-04-16 12:08 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-04-16 12:45 ` David Laight
2019-04-16 15:43 ` Theodore Ts'o
2019-04-16 16:07 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-04-16 16:47 ` Reshetova, Elena
2019-04-17 9:28 ` David Laight
2019-04-17 15:15 ` Theodore Ts'o
2019-04-17 15:40 ` Kees Cook
2019-04-17 15:53 ` David Laight
2019-04-24 11:42 ` Reshetova, Elena
2019-04-24 13:33 ` David Laight
2019-04-25 11:23 ` Reshetova, Elena
2019-04-26 11:33 ` Reshetova, Elena
2019-04-26 14:01 ` Theodore Ts'o
2019-04-26 17:44 ` Eric Biggers
2019-04-26 18:02 ` Theodore Ts'o
2019-04-27 13:59 ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-04-29 8:04 ` Reshetova, Elena
2019-04-26 18:34 ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-04-29 7:46 ` Reshetova, Elena [this message]
2019-04-29 16:08 ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-04-30 17:51 ` Reshetova, Elena
2019-04-30 18:01 ` Kees Cook
2019-05-01 8:23 ` David Laight
2019-05-02 8:07 ` Reshetova, Elena
2019-05-01 8:41 ` David Laight
2019-05-01 23:33 ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-05-02 8:15 ` Reshetova, Elena
2019-05-02 9:23 ` David Laight
2019-05-02 14:47 ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-05-02 15:08 ` Ingo Molnar
2019-05-02 16:32 ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-05-02 16:43 ` Ingo Molnar
2019-05-03 16:40 ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-05-02 16:34 ` David Laight
2019-05-02 16:45 ` Ingo Molnar
2019-05-03 16:17 ` Reshetova, Elena
2019-05-03 16:40 ` David Laight
2019-05-03 19:10 ` Linus Torvalds
2019-05-06 6:47 ` Reshetova, Elena
2019-05-06 7:01 ` Reshetova, Elena
2019-05-08 11:18 ` Reshetova, Elena
2019-05-08 11:32 ` Ingo Molnar
2019-05-08 13:22 ` Reshetova, Elena
2019-05-09 5:59 ` Ingo Molnar
2019-05-09 7:01 ` Reshetova, Elena
2019-05-09 8:43 ` Ingo Molnar
2019-05-11 22:45 ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-05-12 0:12 ` Kees Cook
2019-05-12 8:02 ` Ingo Molnar
2019-05-12 14:33 ` Kees Cook
2019-05-28 12:28 ` Reshetova, Elena
2019-05-28 13:33 ` Theodore Ts'o
2019-05-29 10:13 ` Reshetova, Elena
2019-05-29 10:51 ` David Laight
2019-05-29 18:35 ` Kees Cook
2019-05-29 18:37 ` Kees Cook
2019-07-29 11:41 ` Reshetova, Elena
2019-07-30 18:07 ` Kees Cook
2019-08-01 6:35 ` Reshetova, Elena
2019-05-09 7:03 ` Reshetova, Elena
2019-05-06 7:32 ` Reshetova, Elena
2019-04-29 7:49 ` Reshetova, Elena
2019-04-26 17:37 ` Edgecombe, Rick P
2019-04-17 6:24 ` Ingo Molnar
2019-04-16 18:19 ` Reshetova, Elena
[not found] <20190408061358.21288-1-elena.reshetova@intel.com>
2019-04-08 12:49 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2019-04-08 13:30 ` Reshetova, Elena
2019-04-08 16:21 ` Kees Cook
2019-04-10 8:26 ` Ingo Molnar
2019-04-10 9:00 ` Reshetova, Elena
2019-04-10 10:17 ` Ingo Molnar
2019-04-10 10:24 ` Reshetova, Elena
2019-04-10 14:52 ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-04-12 5:36 ` Reshetova, Elena
2019-04-12 21:16 ` Andy Lutomirski
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=2236FBA76BA1254E88B949DDB74E612BA4C66A8A@IRSMSX102.ger.corp.intel.com \
--to=elena.reshetova@intel.com \
--cc=David.Laight@aculab.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=ebiggers3@gmail.com \
--cc=ebiggers@google.com \
--cc=enrico.perla@intel.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=herbert@gondor.apana.org.au \
--cc=jannh@google.com \
--cc=jpoimboe@redhat.com \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luto@amacapital.net \
--cc=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
/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).