xen-devel
[Xen-devel] RE: [RFC] transcendent memory for Linux
To: |
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@xxxxxxxx> |
Subject: |
[Xen-devel] RE: [RFC] transcendent memory for Linux |
From: |
Dan Magenheimer <dan.magenheimer@xxxxxxxxxx> |
Date: |
Tue, 30 Jun 2009 14:21:35 -0700 (PDT) |
Cc: |
npiggin@xxxxxxx, akpm@xxxxxxxx, xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, tmem-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, alan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-mm@xxxxxxxxx, kurt.hackel@xxxxxxxxxx, Rusty Russell <rusty@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, dave.mccracken@xxxxxxxxxx, Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@xxxxxxxxxx>, Himanshu Raj <rhim@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, sunil.mushran@xxxxxxxxxx, Avi Kivity <avi@xxxxxxxxxx>, Pavel Machek <pavel@xxxxxx>, Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@xxxxxxxxxx>, chris.mason@xxxxxxxxxx, Balbir Singh <balbir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
Delivery-date: |
Mon, 06 Jul 2009 08:03:16 -0700 |
Envelope-to: |
www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
In-reply-to: |
<4A493D19.4050908@xxxxxxxx> |
List-help: |
<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help> |
List-id: |
Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com> |
List-post: |
<mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com> |
List-subscribe: |
<http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe> |
List-unsubscribe: |
<http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe> |
Sender: |
xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
> From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge [mailto:jeremy@xxxxxxxx]
> On 06/29/09 14:57, Dan Magenheimer wrote:
> > Interesting question. But, more than the 128-bit UUID must
> > be guessed... a valid 64-bit object id and a valid 32-bit
> > page index must also be guessed (though most instances of
> > the page index are small numbers so easy to guess). Once
> > 192 bits are guessed though, yes, the pages could be viewed
> > and modified. I suspect there are much more easily targeted
> > security holes in most data centers than guessing 192 (or
> > even 128) bits.
>
> If its possible to verify the uuid is valid before trying to find a
> valid oid+page, then its much easier (since you can concentrate on the
> uuid first).
No, the uuid can't be verified. Tmem gives no indication
as to whether a newly-created pool is already in use (shared)
by another guest. So without both the 128-bit uuid and an
already-in-use 64-bit object id and 32-bit page index, no data
is readable or writable by the attacker.
> You also have to consider the case of a domain which was once part of
> the ocfs cluster, but now is not - it may still know the uuid, but not
> be otherwise allowed to use the cluster.
> If the uuid is derived from something like the
> filesystem's uuid - which wouldn't normally be considered sensitive
> information - then its not like its a search of the full
> 128-bit space.
> And even if it were secret, uuids are not generally 128
> randomly chosen bits.
Hmmm... that is definitely a thornier problem. I guess the
security angle definitely deserves more design. But, again,
this affects only shared precache which is not intended
to part of the proposed initial tmem patchset, so this is a futures
issue.)
Thanks again for the feedback!
Dan
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
|
|