On Sat, Oct 17, 2020 at 6:34 AM Colm MacCarthaigh <colmmacc@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 16 Oct 2020, at 21:02, Jann Horn wrote: > > On Sat, Oct 17, 2020 at 5:36 AM Willy Tarreau <w@xxxxxx> wrote: > > But in userspace, we just need a simple counter. There's no need for > > us to worry about anything else, like timestamps or whatever. If we > > repeatedly fork a paused VM, the forked VMs will see the same counter > > value, but that's totally fine, because the only thing that matters to > > userspace is that the counter changes when the VM is forked. > > For user-space, even a single bit would do. We added MADVISE_WIPEONFORK > so that userspace libraries can detect fork()/clone() robustly, for the > same reasons. It just wipes a page as the indicator, which is > effectively a single-bit signal, and it works well. On the user-space > side of this, I’m keen to find a solution like that that we can use > fairly easily inside of portable libraries and applications. The “have > I forked” checks do end up in hot paths, so it’s nice if they can be > CPU cache friendly. Comparing a whole 128-bit value wouldn’t be my > favorite. I'm pretty sure a single bit is not enough if you want to have a single page, shared across the entire system, that stores the VM forking state; you need a counter for that. > > And actually, since the value is a cryptographically random 128-bit > > value, I think that we should definitely use it to help reseed the > > kernel's RNG, and keep it secret from userspace. That way, even if the > > VM image is public, we can ensure that going forward, the kernel RNG > > will return securely random data. > > If the image is public, you need some extra new raw entropy from > somewhere. The gen-id could be mixed in, that can’t do any harm as > long as rigorous cryptographic mixing with the prior state is used, but > if that’s all you do then the final state is still deterministic and > non-secret. Microsoft's documentation (http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=260709) says that the VM Generation ID that we get after a fork "is a 128-bit, cryptographically random integer value". If multiple people use the same image, it guarantees that each use of the image gets its own, fresh ID: The table in section "How to implement virtual machine generation ID support in a virtualization platform" says that (among other things) "Virtual machine is imported, copied, or cloned" generates a new generation ID. So the RNG state after mixing in the new VM Generation ID would contain 128 bits of secret entropy not known to anyone else, including people with access to the VM image. Now, 128 bits of cryptographically random data aren't _optimal_; I think something on the order of 256 bits would be nicer from a theoretical standpoint. But in practice I think we'll be good with the 128 bits we're getting (since the number of users who fork a VM image is probably not going to be so large that worst-case collision probabilities matter). > The kernel would need to use the change as a trigger to > measure some entropy (e.g. interrupts and RDRAND, or whatever). Our just > define the machine contract as “this has to be unique random data and > if it’s not unique, or if it’s pubic, you’re toast”. As far as I can tell from Microsoft's spec, that is a guarantee we're already getting.
