On Mon, Dec 03, 2018 at 06:28:00PM -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 06:51:50PM +0300, Mika Westerberg wrote:
> > A malicious PCI device may use DMA to attack the system. An external
> > Thunderbolt port is a convenient point to attach such a device. The OS
> > may use IOMMU to defend against DMA attacks.
> >
> > Recent BIOSes with Thunderbolt ports mark these externally facing root
> > ports with this ACPI _DSD [1]:
>
> I'm not 100% comfortable with the "Recent BIOSes" wording because that
> suggests that we can rely on the fact that *all* BIOSes newer than
> some date X mark these ports.
>
> Since this _DSD usage is Microsoft-specific and not required by either
> PCIe or ACPI specs, we can't rely on it. A BIOS that doesn't
> implement it may not be Windows-certified, but it's perfectly
> spec-compliant otherwise and we have to keep in mind the possibility
> that ports without this _DSD may still be externally visible and may
> still be attack vectors.
OK.
I will change it to "Some BIOSes .." following what you suggested
earlier. That should make it clear not all BIOSes are required to
implement this.
> > Name (_DSD, Package () {
> > ToUUID ("efcc06cc-73ac-4bc3-bff0-76143807c389"),
> > Package () {
> > Package () {"ExternalFacingPort", 1},
> > Package () {"UID", 0 }
> > }
> > })
> >
> > If we find such a root port, mark it and all its children as untrusted.
> > The rest of the OS may use this information to enable DMA protection
> > against malicious devices. For instance the device may be put behind an
> > IOMMU to keep it from accessing memory outside of what the driver has
> > allocated for it.
> >
> > While at it, add a comment on top of prp_guids array explaining the
> > possible caveat resulting when these GUIDs are treated equivalent.
> >
> > [1] https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-hardware/drivers/pci/dsd-for-pcie-root-ports#identifying-externally-exposed-pcie-root-ports
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Acked-by: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@xxxxxxxxxx>
Thanks!
