From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753569AbaDKVPW (ORCPT ); Fri, 11 Apr 2014 17:15:22 -0400 Received: from smtp-outbound-1.vmware.com ([208.91.2.12]:33859 "EHLO smtp-outbound-1.vmware.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750813AbaDKVPV (ORCPT ); Fri, 11 Apr 2014 17:15:21 -0400 Message-ID: <53485B63.1030305@vmware.com> Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2014 23:15:15 +0200 From: Thomas Hellstrom User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130625 Thunderbird/17.0.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: David Herrmann CC: Thomas Hellstrom , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org" Subject: Re: DRM security flaws and security levels. References: <5347E32B.1080002@vmware.com> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 04/11/2014 10:31 PM, David Herrmann wrote: > Hi > > On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 2:42 PM, Thomas Hellstrom wrote: >> as was discussed a while ago, there are some serious security flaws with >> the current drm master model, that allows a >> user that had previous access or current access to an X server terminal >> to access the GPU memory of the active X server, without being >> authenticated to the X server and thereby also access other user's >> secret information > 1a) and 1b) are moot if you disallow primary-node access but require > clients to use render-nodes with dma-buf. There're no gem-names on > render-nodes so no way to access other buffers (assuming the GPU does > command-stream checking and/or VM). Disallowing primary node access will break older user-space drivers and non-root EGL clients. I'm not sure that's OK, even if the change is done from user-space. A simple gem fix would also do the trick. > > 2) There is no DRM-generic data other than buffers that is global. So > imho this is a driver-specific issue. > > So I cannot see why this is a DRM issue. The only leaks I see are > legacy interfaces and driver-specific interfaces. The first can be > disabled via chmod() for clients, and the second is something driver > authors should fix. Yeah, but some driver authors can't or won't fix the drivers w r t this, hence the security levels. Thanks, /Thomas > > Thanks > David > _______________________________________________ > dri-devel mailing list > dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel