From: Dan Magenheimer <dan.magenheimer@oracle.com>
To: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org>
Cc: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, xen-devel@lists.xensource.com,
npiggin@suse.de, chris.mason@oracle.com, kurt.hackel@oracle.com,
dave.mccracken@oracle.com, Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk, Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>,
Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>,
akpm@osdl.org, Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>,
Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
tmem-devel@oss.oracle.com, sunil.mushran@oracle.com,
linux-mm@kvack.org, Himanshu Raj <rhim@microsoft.com>
Subject: RE: [RFC] transcendent memory for Linux
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2009 14:21:35 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <c31ca108-9b68-40ba-936f-3ed2a56fd90b@default> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4A493D19.4050908@goop.org>
> From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge [mailto:jeremy@goop.org]
> 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
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-06-30 21:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-06-19 23:53 Dan Magenheimer
2009-06-20 1:35 ` [RFC PATCH 0/4] transcendent memory ("tmem") " Dan Magenheimer
2009-06-20 1:35 ` [RFC PATCH 1/4] tmem: infrastructure for tmem layer Dan Magenheimer
2009-06-20 1:50 ` Rik van Riel
2009-06-20 1:35 ` [RFC PATCH 2/4] tmem: precache implementation (layered on tmem) Dan Magenheimer
2009-06-20 2:28 ` Rik van Riel
2009-06-20 1:36 ` [RFC PATCH 3/4] tmem: preswap " Dan Magenheimer
2009-06-20 1:36 ` [RFC PATCH 4/4] tmem: interface code for tmem on top of xen Dan Magenheimer
2009-06-22 11:27 ` [RFC] transcendent memory for Linux Martin Schwidefsky
2009-06-22 20:41 ` Dan Magenheimer
2009-06-22 14:31 ` Chris Friesen
2009-06-22 20:50 ` Dan Magenheimer
2009-06-24 15:04 ` Pavel Machek
2009-06-29 14:34 ` Dan Magenheimer
2009-06-29 20:36 ` Pavel Machek
2009-06-29 21:13 ` Dan Magenheimer
2009-06-29 21:23 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2009-06-29 21:57 ` Dan Magenheimer
2009-06-29 22:15 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2009-06-30 21:21 ` Dan Magenheimer [this message]
2009-06-30 22:46 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2009-07-01 23:02 ` Dan Magenheimer
2009-07-01 23:31 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2009-07-02 6:38 ` Pavel Machek
2009-07-02 14:03 ` Dan Magenheimer
2009-06-27 13:18 ` Linus Walleij
2009-06-28 7:42 ` Avi Kivity
2009-06-29 14:44 ` Dan Magenheimer
2009-07-01 3:41 ` Roland Dreier
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=c31ca108-9b68-40ba-936f-3ed2a56fd90b@default \
--to=dan.magenheimer@oracle.com \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=avi@redhat.com \
--cc=balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=chris.mason@oracle.com \
--cc=dave.mccracken@oracle.com \
--cc=jeremy@goop.org \
--cc=kurt.hackel@oracle.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mtosatti@redhat.com \
--cc=npiggin@suse.de \
--cc=pavel@ucw.cz \
--cc=rhim@microsoft.com \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
--cc=schwidefsky@de.ibm.com \
--cc=sunil.mushran@oracle.com \
--cc=tmem-devel@oss.oracle.com \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xensource.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