From: Nadav Amit <namit@vmware.com>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
Marius Hillenbrand <mhillenb@amazon.de>,
kvm list <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Kernel Hardening <kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com>,
Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>, Alexander Graf <graf@amazon.de>,
David Woodhouse <dwmw@amazon.co.uk>,
the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC 00/10] Process-local memory allocations for hiding KVM secrets
Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2019 01:50:46 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <F05B97DB-34BD-44CF-AC6A-945D7AD39C38@vmware.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CALCETrXHbS9VXfZ80kOjiTrreM2EbapYeGp68mvJPbosUtorYA@mail.gmail.com>
> On Jun 12, 2019, at 6:30 PM, Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 1:27 PM Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net> wrote:
>>> On Jun 12, 2019, at 12:55 PM, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 6/12/19 10:08 AM, Marius Hillenbrand wrote:
>>>> This patch series proposes to introduce a region for what we call
>>>> process-local memory into the kernel's virtual address space.
>>>
>>> It might be fun to cc some x86 folks on this series. They might have
>>> some relevant opinions. ;)
>>>
>>> A few high-level questions:
>>>
>>> Why go to all this trouble to hide guest state like registers if all the
>>> guest data itself is still mapped?
>>>
>>> Where's the context-switching code? Did I just miss it?
>>>
>>> We've discussed having per-cpu page tables where a given PGD is only in
>>> use from one CPU at a time. I *think* this scheme still works in such a
>>> case, it just adds one more PGD entry that would have to context-switched.
>>
>> Fair warning: Linus is on record as absolutely hating this idea. He might change his mind, but it’s an uphill battle.
>
> I looked at the patch, and it (sensibly) has nothing to do with
> per-cpu PGDs. So it's in great shape!
>
> Seriously, though, here are some very high-level review comments:
>
> Please don't call it "process local", since "process" is meaningless.
> Call it "mm local" or something like that.
>
> We already have a per-mm kernel mapping: the LDT. So please nix all
> the code that adds a new VA region, etc, except to the extent that
> some of it consists of valid cleanups in and of itself. Instead,
> please refactor the LDT code (arch/x86/kernel/ldt.c, mainly) to make
> it use a more general "mm local" address range, and then reuse the
> same infrastructure for other fancy things. The code that makes it
> KASLR-able should be in its very own patch that applies *after* the
> code that makes it all work so that, when the KASLR part causes a
> crash, we can bisect it.
>
> + /*
> + * Faults in process-local memory may be caused by process-local
> + * addresses leaking into other contexts.
> + * tbd: warn and handle gracefully.
> + */
> + if (unlikely(fault_in_process_local(address))) {
> + pr_err("page fault in PROCLOCAL at %lx", address);
> + force_sig_fault(SIGSEGV, SEGV_MAPERR, (void __user *)address, current);
> + }
> +
>
> Huh? Either it's an OOPS or you shouldn't print any special
> debugging. As it is, you're just blatantly leaking the address of the
> mm-local range to malicious user programs.
>
> Also, you should IMO consider using this mechanism for kmap_atomic().
> Hi, Nadav!
Well, some context for the “hi” would have been helpful. (Do I have a bug
and I still don’t understand it?)
Perhaps you regard some use-case for a similar mechanism that I mentioned
before. I did implement something similar (but not the way that you wanted)
to improve the performance of seccomp and system-calls when retpolines are
used. I set per-mm code area that held code that used direct calls to invoke
seccomp filters and frequently used system-calls.
My mechanism, I think, is more not suitable for this use-case. I needed my
code-page to be at the same 2GB range as the kernel text/modules, which does
complicate things. Due to the same reason, it is also limited in the size of
the data/code that it can hold.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-06-13 16:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 44+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-06-12 17:08 [RFC 00/10] Process-local memory allocations for hiding KVM secrets Marius Hillenbrand
2019-06-12 17:08 ` [RFC 01/10] x86/mm/kaslr: refactor to use enum indices for regions Marius Hillenbrand
2019-06-12 17:08 ` [RFC 02/10] x86/speculation, mm: add process local virtual memory region Marius Hillenbrand
2019-06-12 17:08 ` [RFC 03/10] x86/mm, mm,kernel: add teardown for process-local memory to mm cleanup Marius Hillenbrand
2019-06-12 17:08 ` [RFC 04/10] mm: allocate virtual space for process-local memory Marius Hillenbrand
2019-06-12 17:08 ` [RFC 05/10] mm: allocate/release physical pages " Marius Hillenbrand
2019-06-12 17:08 ` [RFC 06/10] kvm/x86: add support for storing vCPU state in " Marius Hillenbrand
2019-06-12 17:08 ` [RFC 07/10] kvm, vmx: move CR2 context switch out of assembly path Marius Hillenbrand
2019-06-12 17:08 ` [RFC 08/10] kvm, vmx: move register clearing " Marius Hillenbrand
2019-06-12 17:08 ` [RFC 09/10] kvm, vmx: move gprs to process local memory Marius Hillenbrand
2019-06-12 17:08 ` [RFC 10/10] kvm, x86: move guest FPU state into " Marius Hillenbrand
2019-06-12 18:25 ` [RFC 00/10] Process-local memory allocations for hiding KVM secrets Sean Christopherson
2019-06-13 7:20 ` Alexander Graf
2019-06-13 10:54 ` Liran Alon
2019-06-12 19:55 ` Dave Hansen
2019-06-12 20:27 ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-06-12 20:41 ` Dave Hansen
2019-06-12 20:56 ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-06-13 1:30 ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-06-13 1:50 ` Nadav Amit [this message]
2019-06-13 16:16 ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-06-13 7:52 ` Alexander Graf
2019-06-13 16:13 ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-06-13 16:20 ` Dave Hansen
2019-06-13 17:29 ` Nadav Amit
2019-06-13 17:49 ` Dave Hansen
2019-06-13 20:05 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-06-14 14:21 ` Thomas Gleixner
2019-06-16 22:18 ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-06-16 22:28 ` Thomas Gleixner
2019-06-17 7:38 ` Alexander Graf
2019-06-17 15:50 ` Dave Hansen
2019-06-17 15:54 ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-06-17 16:03 ` Dave Hansen
2019-06-17 16:14 ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-06-17 16:53 ` Nadav Amit
2019-06-17 18:07 ` Dave Hansen
2019-06-17 18:45 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2019-06-17 18:49 ` Dave Hansen
2019-06-17 18:53 ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-06-17 18:50 ` Nadav Amit
2019-06-17 18:55 ` Dave Hansen
2019-06-13 7:27 ` Alexander Graf
2019-06-13 14:19 ` Dave Hansen
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=F05B97DB-34BD-44CF-AC6A-945D7AD39C38@vmware.com \
--to=namit@vmware.com \
--cc=dave.hansen@intel.com \
--cc=dwmw@amazon.co.uk \
--cc=graf@amazon.de \
--cc=kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=mhillenb@amazon.de \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--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
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).