From: Martin Kletzander <mkletzan@redhat.com>
To: "Daniel P. Berrangé" <berrange@redhat.com>
Cc: Erik Skultety <eskultet@redhat.com>,
libvir-list@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org,
brijesh.singh@amd.com, dinechin@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] AMD SEV's /dev/sev permissions and probing QEMU for capabilities
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2019 12:31:38 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190118113138.GA8296@wheatley> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190118111711.GJ20660@redhat.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2239 bytes --]
On Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 11:17:11AM +0000, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
>On Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 12:11:50PM +0100, Martin Kletzander wrote:
>> On Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 10:16:38AM +0000, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
>> > I've just realized there is a potential 3rd solution. Remember there is
>> > actually nothing inherantly special about the 'root' user as an account
>> > ID. 'root' gains its powers from the fact that it has many capabilities
>> > by default. 'qemu' can't access /dev/sev because it is owned by a
>> > different user (happens to be root) and 'qemu' does not have capabilities.
>> >
>> > So we can make probing work by using our capabilities code to grant
>> > CAP_DAC_OVERRIDE to the qemu process we spawn. So probing still runs
>> > as 'qemu', but can none the less access /dev/sev while it is owned
>> > by root. We were not using 'qemu' for sake of security, as the probing
>> > process is not executing any untrusthworthy code, so we don't loose any
>> > security protection by granting CAP_DAC_OVERRIDE.
>> >
>>
>> IMHO CAP_DAC_OVERRIDE is a lot, especially on systems without SELinux.
>
>Probing of QEMU capabilities is not a security critical task. QEMU is
>run with "-machine none" so does not even create the virtual machine
>hardware, nor have any guest image that it would run. All it is running
>is the QEMU class initialization code. The only way for that to act in
>a malicious way is for a backdoor to have been inserted when QEMU was
>built by the OS vendor, or fo the QEMU binary on disk to have been
>replaced by something malcious (which would require root privileges
>itself).
>
So you are trying to protect from buggy qemu with malicious guest, not really a
malicious qemu. I got confused as SEV is trying to protect against
untrustworthy host including binaries like qemu. OK
>
>We must of coure *NEVER* give CAP_DAC_OVERRIDE to a QEMU that is running
>the real, untrustworty, end user VM.
>
>Regards,
>Daniel
>--
>|: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :|
>|: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :|
>|: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-01-18 11:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-01-18 9:39 [Qemu-devel] AMD SEV's /dev/sev permissions and probing QEMU for capabilities Erik Skultety
2019-01-18 10:16 ` Daniel P. Berrangé
2019-01-18 10:56 ` [Qemu-devel] [libvirt] " Erik Skultety
2019-01-18 11:11 ` [Qemu-devel] " Martin Kletzander
2019-01-18 11:17 ` Daniel P. Berrangé
2019-01-18 11:31 ` Martin Kletzander [this message]
2019-01-18 12:51 ` Singh, Brijesh
2019-01-23 12:55 ` Erik Skultety
2019-01-23 13:10 ` Daniel P. Berrangé
2019-01-23 13:22 ` Erik Skultety
2019-01-23 13:24 ` Daniel P. Berrangé
2019-01-23 13:33 ` Erik Skultety
2019-01-23 13:36 ` Daniel P. Berrangé
2019-01-23 15:02 ` Singh, Brijesh
2019-01-23 15:29 ` Erik Skultety
2019-01-29 16:15 ` Erik Skultety
2019-01-29 18:40 ` Daniel P. Berrangé
2019-01-30 8:06 ` Erik Skultety
2019-01-30 10:37 ` Daniel P. Berrangé
2019-01-30 13:39 ` Erik Skultety
2019-01-30 17:47 ` Singh, Brijesh
2019-01-30 18:18 ` Daniel P. Berrangé
2019-01-31 15:28 ` Erik Skultety
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=20190118113138.GA8296@wheatley \
--to=mkletzan@redhat.com \
--cc=berrange@redhat.com \
--cc=brijesh.singh@amd.com \
--cc=dinechin@redhat.com \
--cc=eskultet@redhat.com \
--cc=libvir-list@redhat.com \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.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).