Re: [PATCH 01/12] Security: Add CAP_COMPROMISE_KERNEL
From: Alex Williamson
Date: Tue Mar 19 2013 - 23:18:49 EST
On Tue, 2013-03-19 at 20:08 -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 03/19/2013 07:48 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> > On 03/19/2013 06:28 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> >> Mm. The question is whether we can reliably determine the ranges a
> device should be able to access without having to trust userspace
> (and, ideally, without having to worry about whether iommu vendors
> have done their job). It's pretty important for PCI passthrough, so we
> do need to care.
> > It is actually very simple: the device should be able to DMA into/out of:
> > 1. pinned pages
> > 2. owned by the process controlling the device
> > ... and nothing else.
> The "pinning" process needs to involve a call to the kernel to process
> the page for DMA (pinning the page and opening it in the iommu) and
> return a transaction address, of course.
> I think we have the interface for that in vfio, but I haven't followed
> that work.
Yes, vfio does this and is meant to provide a secure-boot-friendly PCI
passthrough interface. Thanks,
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/