From: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>
Cc: Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>,
"Schaufler, Casey" <casey.schaufler@intel.com>,
James Morris <jmorris@namei.org>,
linux-sgx@vger.kernel.org, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
Cedric Xing <cedric.xing@intel.com>,
Jethro Beekman <jethro@fortanix.com>,
"Dr . Greg Wettstein" <greg@enjellic.com>,
Stephen Smalley <sds@tycho.nsa.gov>,
LSM List <linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 04/12] x86/sgx: Require userspace to define enclave pages' protection bits
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2019 21:51:43 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190807185143.2mfslzsa22fw74qf@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CALCETrVcaL5KfR0V2fiHzQtyQdEC7d9iFNDKp9yBj7QZQsdXyw@mail.gmail.com>
On Mon, Aug 05, 2019 at 02:30:22PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 5, 2019 at 1:51 PM Jarkko Sakkinen
> <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, Aug 04, 2019 at 03:20:24PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> > > On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 9:38 AM Jarkko Sakkinen
> > > <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Jul 15, 2019 at 03:29:23PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> > > > > I would say it differently: regardless of exactly how /dev/sgx/enclave
> > > > > is wired up under the hood, we want a way that a process can be
> > > > > granted permission to usefully run enclaves without being granted
> > > > > permission to execute whatever bytes of code it wants. Preferably
> > > > > without requiring LSMs to maintain some form of enclave signature
> > > > > whitelist.
> > > >
> > > > Would it be better to have a signer whitelist instead or some
> > > > combination? E.g. you could whiteliste either by signer or
> > > > enclave signature.
> > > >
> > >
> > > I'm not sure, and also don't really think we need to commit to an
> > > answer right now. I do think that the eventual solution should be
> > > more flexible than just whitelisting the signers. In particular, it
> > > should be possible to make secure enclaves, open-source or otherwise,
> > > that are reproducibly buildable. This more or less requires that the
> > > signing private key not be a secret, which means that no one would
> > > want to whitelist the signing key. The enclave would be trusted, and
> > > would seal data, on the basis of its MRENCLAVE, and the policy, if
> > > any, would want to whitelist the MRENCLAVE or perhaps the whole
> > > SIGSTRUCT.
> > >
> > > But my overall point is that it should be possible to have a conherent
> > > policy that allows any enclave whatsoever to run but that still
> > > respects EXECMEM and such.
> >
> > So could kernel embed a fixed signing key that would be made available
> > through sysfs for signing? Already have one for my selftest.
> >
>
> Do you mean a public and private key? I was imagining that someone
> would just create a key pair and publish it for the case of SGX
> programs that don't depend on MRSIGNER. There doesn't have to be just
> one.
>
> But I may be misunderstanding you.
Aa, OK, got you. I actually misunderstood you.
/Jarkko
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-08-07 18:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 50+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-06-17 22:24 [RFC PATCH v3 00/12] security: x86/sgx: SGX vs. LSM, round 3 Sean Christopherson
2019-06-17 22:24 ` [RFC PATCH v3 01/12] x86/sgx: Add mm to enclave at mmap() Sean Christopherson
2019-06-17 22:32 ` Dave Hansen
2019-06-17 23:42 ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-06-18 14:11 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-06-18 16:06 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-06-19 12:56 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2019-06-19 13:00 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2019-06-20 20:09 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2019-06-17 22:24 ` [RFC PATCH v3 02/12] x86/sgx: Do not naturally align MAP_FIXED address Sean Christopherson
2019-06-19 13:24 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2019-06-19 14:08 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-06-20 22:07 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2019-06-17 22:24 ` [RFC PATCH v3 03/12] selftests: x86/sgx: Mark the enclave loader as not needing an exec stack Sean Christopherson
2019-06-17 22:24 ` [RFC PATCH v3 04/12] x86/sgx: Require userspace to define enclave pages' protection bits Sean Christopherson
2019-06-19 14:43 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2019-06-19 15:20 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-06-20 22:17 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2019-07-07 19:08 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-07-08 15:23 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2019-07-08 16:19 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-07-09 16:06 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2019-07-10 17:25 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-07-15 22:29 ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-08-01 16:38 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2019-08-04 22:20 ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-08-05 20:51 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2019-08-05 21:30 ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-08-07 18:51 ` Jarkko Sakkinen [this message]
2019-06-17 22:24 ` [RFC PATCH v3 05/12] x86/sgx: Enforce noexec filesystem restriction for enclaves Sean Christopherson
2019-06-19 14:46 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2019-06-17 22:24 ` [RFC PATCH v3 06/12] mm: Introduce vm_ops->may_mprotect() Sean Christopherson
2019-06-17 22:24 ` [RFC PATCH v3 07/12] LSM: x86/sgx: Introduce ->enclave_map() hook for Intel SGX Sean Christopherson
2019-06-17 22:24 ` [RFC PATCH v3 08/12] security/selinux: Require SGX_EXECMEM to map enclave page WX Sean Christopherson
2019-06-17 22:24 ` [RFC PATCH v3 09/12] LSM: x86/sgx: Introduce ->enclave_load() hook for Intel SGX Sean Christopherson
2019-06-19 14:56 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2019-06-19 21:13 ` James Morris
2019-06-20 9:28 ` Dr. Greg
2019-06-20 22:22 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
2019-06-23 17:16 ` Dr. Greg
2019-06-26 20:39 ` James Morris
2019-06-17 22:24 ` [RFC PATCH v3 10/12] security/selinux: Add enclave_load() implementation Sean Christopherson
2019-06-18 14:49 ` Stephen Smalley
2019-06-19 20:59 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-06-17 22:24 ` [RFC PATCH v3 11/12] security/apparmor: " Sean Christopherson
2019-06-17 22:24 ` [RFC PATCH v3 12/12] LSM: x86/sgx: Show line of sight to LSM support SGX2's EAUG Sean Christopherson
2019-06-18 13:38 ` [RFC PATCH v3 00/12] security: x86/sgx: SGX vs. LSM, round 3 Stephen Smalley
2019-06-18 13:55 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-06-18 15:13 ` Stephen Smalley
2019-06-25 16:29 ` Jarkko Sakkinen
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=20190807185143.2mfslzsa22fw74qf@linux.intel.com \
--to=jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=casey.schaufler@intel.com \
--cc=cedric.xing@intel.com \
--cc=dave.hansen@intel.com \
--cc=greg@enjellic.com \
--cc=jethro@fortanix.com \
--cc=jmorris@namei.org \
--cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-sgx@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=sds@tycho.nsa.gov \
--cc=sean.j.christopherson@intel.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