Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] qemu: Add support for RAPL MSRs feature

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi,

Anthony Harivel, Sep 05, 2024 at 13:01:
>
> Hi,
>
> Anthony Harivel, Sep 03, 2024 at 14:41:
> > Daniel P. Berrangé, Sep 03, 2024 at 14:24:
> > > On Tue, Sep 03, 2024 at 02:16:58PM +0200, Peter Krempa wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Sep 03, 2024 at 13:29:28 +0200, Anthony Harivel wrote:
> > > > > Daniel P. Berrangé, Sep 03, 2024 at 12:08:
> > > > > > On Mon, Sep 02, 2024 at 03:09:42PM +0200, Peter Krempa wrote:
> > > > > > > On Thu, Aug 22, 2024 at 17:59:47 +0200, Anthony Harivel wrote:
> > > > > > > > Add the support in libvirt to activate the RAPL feature in QEMU.
> > > > > > > I suppose that the 'rapl-helper-socket' is a shared (multiple qemu's use
> > > > > > > it) resource set up beforehand by the admin. Right?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The qemu-pr-helper could be run as a single instnce, or it could be
> > > > > > run per-QEMU instance. The latter would give us better security
> > > > > > isolation, for what is a privileged daemon. On the other hand, I
> > > > > > wonder about the CPU overhead of having 100's of copies of the
> > > > > > process running on a host.
> > > > 
> > > > So when I was originally skimming trhough the docs I didn't properly
> > > > understand that the reason for the helper daemon is that there was a
> > > > security issue with accessing the measurement counters and thought it
> > > > was strictly for performance reasons.
> > >
> > > Yep, this is only for security reasons.
> > >
> >
> > TL;DR: 
> > "A malicious user application may use RAPL to infer confidential 
> > information of another unprivileged application running on the same or 
> > a different CPU core by observing the power-related behavior of the 
> > victim application."
> >
> > The answer from Intel was to put the interface being privileged 
> > permission. 
> >
> > Link:
> > https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/developer/articles/technical/software-security-guidance/advisory-guidance/running-average-power-limit-energy-reporting.html
> >
> > > > > If it runs on a single instance, then the socket needs to be chmod/chown 
> > > > > to something like qemu / libvirt group with access only to root and 
> > > > > group.
> > > > 
> > > > Another alternative for a shared instance to be used by multiple qemu
> > > > instances is that libvirt can open the socket and pass it to qemu, which
> > > > avoids the potential issue at-least with DAC security labels as the
> > > > socket can be owned by root:root with mode 600.
> > > > 
> > > > I'm not sure how the selinux policy for that daemon looks though.
> > >
> > > I don't believe any policy exists yet, since this is a brand new
> > > service.
> > >
> > > > > Running one helper instance per-QEMU instance would mean that every 
> > > > > instance read 1 MSR / Package every second. The socket is left open 
> > > > > (thanks to Daniel suggestion in QEMU review). The impact would be quite 
> > > > > low I guess on the housekeeping CPU.
> > > > > 
> > > > > When I designed the daemon with Paolo, the first solution was the main 
> > > > > idea but I'm open to any solution that leads to a better adoption of the 
> > > > > feature. 
> > > > 
> > > > Libvirt can obviously manage also a per VM instance, which should be
> > > > straightforward, but not as simple as this patch. This can theoretically
> > > > also be added later, e.g. by adding a 'managed' property enabling the
> > > > libvirt-managed daemon.
> > >
> > > A parallel would be the qemu-pr-helper which this new service was initially
> > > derived from in terms of archicture. It also runs privileged for security
> > > reasons and can be single shared instance, or per-VM instance.
> > >
> >
> > Which actually leads to the question to the following:
> > Why do I "simply" not do like the qemu-pr-helper in libvirt ?
> >
> > see qemuProcessStartManagedPRDaemon() in src/qemu/qemu_process.c +2808
> >
> >
> > > With 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 :|
>
> If I may resume the conversation:
>
> 1) The helper daemon is primarily needed for security reasons to prevent 
>    potential leaks of confidential information through RAPL.
>
> 2) There are two main ways to handle the helper daemon:
>     > Single instance for all QEMU processes:
>     This requires adjusting socket permissions (chmod/chown) to control 
>     access securely.
>     > One instance per QEMU process: This offers better isolation but 
>     might increase CPU overhead slightly if the number of instances 
>     running get high.
>
> 3) Libvirt can manage both approaches, but no existing SELinux policy 
>    covers this yet, so we’ll need to consider that.
>
> 4) qemu-pr-helper is very similar to the qemu-vmsr-helper in terms of 
>    architecture and in terms of privileged needs. It can be single 
>    shared instance or per-vm instance. 
>
>
> I cannot find the original patch that has added qemu-pr-helper into 
> libvirt. The latest commit in src/qemu/qemu_process is 7eead248c65f 
> and it doesn't look right IMHO.
>
> If you have a reference to the original patch, I can use it as a guide 
> to implement this helper in the same way, if you believe that is the 
> best solution. 
>
> Thanks,
> Anthony

Gentle ping for the above discussion.

Thanks,
Anthony




[Index of Archives]     [Virt Tools]     [Libvirt Users]     [Lib OS Info]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Big List of Linux Books]     [Yosemite News]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]

  Powered by Linux