Re: Linux guest kernel threat model for Confidential Computing

From: Dr. David Alan Gilbert
Date: Thu Jan 26 2023 - 05:50:53 EST


* Lukas Wunner (lukas@xxxxxxxxx) wrote:
> [cc += Jonathan Cameron, linux-pci]
>
> On Wed, Jan 25, 2023 at 02:57:40PM +0000, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote:
> > Greg Kroah-Hartman (gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx) wrote:
> > > Great, so why not have hardware attestation also for your devices you
> > > wish to talk to? Why not use that as well? Then you don't have to
> > > worry about anything in the guest.
> >
> > There were some talks at Plumbers where PCIe is working on adding that;
> > it's not there yet though. I think that's PCIe 'Integrity and Data
> > Encryption' (IDE - sigh), and PCIe 'Security Prtocol and Data Model' -
> > SPDM. I don't know much of the detail of those, just that they're far
> > enough off that people aren't depending on them yet.
>
> CMA/SPDM (PCIe r6.0 sec 6.31) is in active development on this branch:
>
> https://github.com/l1k/linux/commits/doe

Thanks for the pointer - I'll go and hunt down that spec.

> It will allow for authentication of PCIe devices. Goal is to submit
> this quarter (Q1). Afterwards we'll look into retrieving measurements
> via CMA/SPDM and bringing up IDE encryption.
>
> It's a kernel-native implementation which uses the existing crypto and
> keys infrastructure and is wired into the appropriate places in the
> PCI core to authenticate devices on enumeration and reauthenticate
> when CMA/SPDM state is lost (after resume from D3cold, after a
> Secondary Bus Reset and after a DPC-induced Hot Reset).
>
> The device authentication service afforded here is generic.
> It is up to users and vendors to decide how to employ it,
> be it for "confidential computing" or something else.

As Samuel asks about who is doing the challenge; but I guess there are
also things like what happens when the host controls intermediate
switches and BAR access and when only VFs are passed to guests.

> Trusted root certificates to validate device certificates can be
> installed into a kernel keyring using the familiar keyctl(1) utility,
> but platform-specific roots of trust (such as a HSM) could be
> supported as well.
>
> I would like to stress that this particular effort is a collaboration
> of multiple vendors. It is decidedly not a single vendor trying to
> shoehorn something into upstream, so the criticism that has been
> leveled upthread against other things does not apply here.
>
> The Plumbers BoF you're referring to was co-authored by Jonathan Cameron
> and me and its purpose was precisely to have an open discussion and
> align on an approach that works for everyone:
>
> https://lpc.events/event/16/contributions/1304/
>
>
> > a) there's no good way to authenticate a PCI device yet
> > - any nasty device can claim to have a given PCI ID.
>
> CMA/SPDM prescribes that the Subject Alternative Name of the device
> certificate contains the Vendor ID, Device ID, Subsystem Vendor ID,
> Subsystem ID, Class Code, Revision and Serial Number (PCIe r6.0
> sec 6.31.3).
>
> Thus a forged Device ID in the Configuration Space Header will result
> in authentication failure.

Good! It'll be nice when people figure out the CoCo integration for
that; I'm still guessing it's a little way off until we get hardware
for that.

Dave

> Thanks,
>
> Lukas
>
--
Dr. David Alan Gilbert / dgilbert@xxxxxxxxxx / Manchester, UK