From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
To: "Huang, Yang" <yang.huang@intel.com>
Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
"virtio-dev@lists.oasis-open.org"
<virtio-dev@lists.oasis-open.org>,
"virtio-comment@lists.oasis-open.org"
<virtio-comment@lists.oasis-open.org>,
"Zhu, Bing" <bing.zhu@intel.com>,
"Winkler, Tomas" <tomas.winkler@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [virtio-comment] RE: [virtio-dev] Re: [virtio-comment] [PATCH] Add virtio rpmb device specification
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2019 01:57:27 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190805012242-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <0B92A36466FABC4D99BAF0BDB1FA8BBC415745C2@shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com>
On Mon, Aug 05, 2019 at 02:39:00AM +0000, Huang, Yang wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > On 29/07/19 09:48, Huang Yang wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > But virtualization software like Qemu doesn't provide
> > > > > > > > > eMMC/UFS/NVMe RPMB emulation. It blocks the OS like Trusty
> > > > > > > > > or OP-TEE running in a virtualization environment. For
> > > > > > > > > instance, Google right now uses another way to work around
> > > > > > > > > RPMB emulation issue when running Trusty in
> > > > > > > > ARM Qemu:
> > > > > > > > > https://android.googlesource.com/trusty/external/trusty/+/
> > > > > > > > > refs
> > > > > > > > > /hea
> > > > > > > > > ds/m
> > > > > > > > > aster/test-runner/
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Virtio RPMB standardization will definitely benefit
> > > > > > > > > OP-TEE, Google Trusty TEE, Qemu, OVMF or other modules to
> > > > > > > > > develop the RPMB based secure storage in virtualization.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Is there any reason to use a new virtio-blk device, and not
> > > > > > > > add this functionality to virtio-blk?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Paolo
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > RPMB does not behave as a blk device. It doesn't have block device
> > APIs.
> > > > > > > Current virtio blk features or definitions in spec are mostly
> > > > > > > useless or
> > > > > > inapplicable to virtio rpmb.
> > > > > > > It performs a different behaviors from the operations on a blk device.
> > > > > > > Key, writer counter or nonce are required to read/write on it.
> > > > > > > If add it to blk device, it will not only cause to a higher
> > > > > > > complexity, but also
> > > > > > cause to two different behaviors on a same device.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Well it seems that current RPMB implementations are all tied to
> > > > > > a storage device, like MMC or NVMe. Why is that and why doesn't
> > > > > > the same
> > > > logic apply here?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > MST
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > RPMB is a mandatory hardware partition of eMMC, UFS and optional
> > > > > for
> > > > NVMe.
> > > > > It is standardized by JEDEC and NVMe.
> > > > > This partition is different from the user data partition that blk device
> > emulates.
> > > > > It provides a signed access in an authenticated and replay
> > > > > protected manner that blk device does not perform. Only RPMB key
> > > > > owner can write to it while anybody can access to a user data partition.
> > > >
> > > > Sorry if I'm being dense, so how is this different from e.g. NVMe?
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > MST
> > >
> > > Do you refer to the difference between NVMe RPMB and eMMC RPMB?
> > > Or between NVMe RPMB partition and NVMe user data partition?
> >
> > I refer to the fact that NVMe and eMMC are storage devices that support an
> > RPMB partition. Why is virtio blk different?
> > wouldn't it make sense for it to support an RPMB partition?
>
> RPMB is not a blk device for the reasons:
> 1. It does not have blk device APIs, or is not applicable.
That's a circular argument, isn't it?
> 2. Moreover, it performs different behaviors.
> It behaves in an authenticated and anti-replay manner, e.g. RPMB access is signed by the RPMB key, and requires a write counter.
> 3. For RPMB and common disks, they are hardware soldered but functions independent.
>
> What do you think?
The question to ask is whether guests use RPMB to protect contents of a
storage device from tampering. If yes then it makes sense as part of
the storage device it protects. for example mmc creates
a bunch of fake block devices for it - it seems likely
userspace is used to dealing with it this way.
Another question to answer is whether by adding a kernel driver
within guest you actually make guest userspace to work.
--
MST
This publicly archived list offers a means to provide input to the
OASIS Virtual I/O Device (VIRTIO) TC.
In order to verify user consent to the Feedback License terms and
to minimize spam in the list archive, subscription is required
before posting.
Subscribe: virtio-comment-subscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
Unsubscribe: virtio-comment-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
List help: virtio-comment-help@lists.oasis-open.org
List archive: https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/virtio-comment/
Feedback License: https://www.oasis-open.org/who/ipr/feedback_license.pdf
List Guidelines: https://www.oasis-open.org/policies-guidelines/mailing-lists
Committee: https://www.oasis-open.org/committees/virtio/
Join OASIS: https://www.oasis-open.org/join/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-08-05 5:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-07-29 7:48 [virtio-comment] [PATCH] Add virtio rpmb device specification Huang Yang
2019-07-29 7:48 ` Huang Yang
2019-07-29 14:54 ` [virtio-comment] " Michael S. Tsirkin
2019-07-30 5:51 ` Huang, Yang
2019-07-30 6:49 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2019-07-29 9:19 ` [virtio-comment] " Paolo Bonzini
2019-07-30 0:33 ` Huang, Yang
2019-08-03 21:00 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2019-08-04 2:07 ` [virtio-comment] RE: [virtio-dev] " Huang, Yang
2019-08-04 7:49 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2019-08-04 13:57 ` Huang, Yang
2019-08-04 18:26 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2019-08-05 2:39 ` Huang, Yang
2019-08-05 5:57 ` Michael S. Tsirkin [this message]
2019-08-05 7:25 ` Huang, Yang
[not found] ` <5B8DA87D05A7694D9FA63FD143655C1B9DC88C3B@hasmsx108.ger.corp.intel.com>
2019-08-05 6:06 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
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=20190805012242-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org \
--to=mst@redhat.com \
--cc=bing.zhu@intel.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=tomas.winkler@intel.com \
--cc=virtio-comment@lists.oasis-open.org \
--cc=virtio-dev@lists.oasis-open.org \
--cc=yang.huang@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