From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752532AbeDQJNs (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Apr 2018 05:13:48 -0400 Received: from bedivere.hansenpartnership.com ([66.63.167.143]:49396 "EHLO bedivere.hansenpartnership.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751327AbeDQJNq (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Apr 2018 05:13:46 -0400 Message-ID: <1523956414.3250.5.camel@HansenPartnership.com> Subject: Re: repeatable boot randomness inside KVM guest From: James Bottomley To: Matthew Wilcox , "Theodore Y. Ts'o" , Alexey Dobriyan , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2018 10:13:34 +0100 In-Reply-To: <20180415004134.GB15294@bombadil.infradead.org> References: <20180414195921.GA10437@avx2> <20180414224419.GA21830@thunk.org> <20180415004134.GB15294@bombadil.infradead.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.22.6 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, 2018-04-14 at 17:41 -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > On Sat, Apr 14, 2018 at 06:44:19PM -0400, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote: > > What needs to happen is freelist should get randomized much later > > in the boot sequence.  Doing it later will require locking; I don't > > know enough about the slab/slub code to know whether the slab_mutex > > would be sufficient, or some other lock might need to be added. > > Could we have the bootloader pass in some initial randomness? Where would the bootloader get it from (securely) that the kernel can't? For example, if you compile in a TPM driver, the kernel will pick up 32 random entropy bytes from the TPM to seed the pool, but I think it happens too late to help with this problem currently. IMA also needs the TPM very early in the boot sequence, so I was wondering about using the initial EFI driver, which is present on boot, and then transitioning to the proper kernel TPM driver later, which would mean we could seed the pool earlier. As long as you mix it properly and limit the amount, it shouldn't necessarily be a source of actual compromise, but having an external input to our cryptographically secure entropy pool is an additional potential attack vector. James