mbox series

[RFC,0/8] x86: Support Intel Key Locker

Message ID 20201216174146.10446-1-chang.seok.bae@intel.com (mailing list archive)
Headers show
Series x86: Support Intel Key Locker | expand

Message

Chang S. Bae Dec. 16, 2020, 5:41 p.m. UTC
Key Locker [1][2] is a new security feature available in new Intel CPUs to
protect data encryption keys for the Advanced Encryption Standard
algorithm. The protection limits the amount of time an AES key is exposed
in memory by sealing a key and referencing it with new AES instructions.

The new AES instruction set is a successor of Intel's AES-NI (AES New
Instruction). Users may switch to the Key Locker version from crypto
libraries.  This series includes a new AES implementation for the Crypto
API, which was validated through the crypto unit tests. The performance in
the test cases was measured and found comparable to the AES-NI version.

Key Locker introduces a (CPU-)internal key to encode AES keys. The kernel
needs to load it and ensure it unchanged as long as CPUs are operational.

The series has three parts:
* PATCH1-6: Implement the internal key management
* PATCH7:   Add AES implementation in Crypto library
* PATCH8:   Provide the hardware randomization option for the internal key

This RFC series has been reviewed by Dan Williams, with an open question of
whether to use hardware backup/restore, or to synchronize reinitialize the
internal key over suspend / resume to avoid the implications of key restore
failures.

[1] Intel Architecture Instruction Set Extensions Programming Reference:
    https://software.intel.com/content/dam/develop/external/us/en/documents/architecture-instruction-set-$
[2] Intel Key Locker Specification:
    https://software.intel.com/content/dam/develop/external/us/en/documents/343965-intel-key-locker-speci$

Chang S. Bae (8):
  x86/cpufeature: Enumerate Key Locker feature
  x86/cpu: Load Key Locker internal key at boot-time
  x86/msr-index: Add MSRs for Key Locker internal key
  x86/power: Restore Key Locker internal key from the ACPI S3/4 sleep
    states
  x86/cpu: Add a config option and a chicken bit for Key Locker
  selftests/x86: Test Key Locker internal key maintenance
  crypto: x86/aes-kl - Support AES algorithm using Key Locker
    instructions
  x86/cpu: Support the hardware randomization option for Key Locker
    internal key

 .../admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt         |   2 +
 arch/x86/Kconfig                              |  14 +
 arch/x86/crypto/Makefile                      |   3 +
 arch/x86/crypto/aeskl-intel_asm.S             | 881 ++++++++++++++++++
 arch/x86/crypto/aeskl-intel_glue.c            | 697 ++++++++++++++
 arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeatures.h            |   1 +
 arch/x86/include/asm/disabled-features.h      |   8 +-
 arch/x86/include/asm/inst.h                   | 201 ++++
 arch/x86/include/asm/keylocker.h              |  41 +
 arch/x86/include/asm/msr-index.h              |   6 +
 arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/processor-flags.h   |   2 +
 arch/x86/kernel/Makefile                      |   1 +
 arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c                  |  66 +-
 arch/x86/kernel/cpu/cpuid-deps.c              |   1 +
 arch/x86/kernel/keylocker.c                   | 147 +++
 arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c                     |   2 +
 arch/x86/lib/x86-opcode-map.txt               |   2 +-
 arch/x86/power/cpu.c                          |  34 +
 crypto/Kconfig                                |  28 +
 drivers/char/random.c                         |   6 +
 include/linux/random.h                        |   2 +
 tools/arch/x86/lib/x86-opcode-map.txt         |   2 +-
 tools/testing/selftests/x86/Makefile          |   2 +-
 tools/testing/selftests/x86/keylocker.c       | 177 ++++
 24 files changed, 2321 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
 create mode 100644 arch/x86/crypto/aeskl-intel_asm.S
 create mode 100644 arch/x86/crypto/aeskl-intel_glue.c
 create mode 100644 arch/x86/include/asm/keylocker.h
 create mode 100644 arch/x86/kernel/keylocker.c
 create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/x86/keylocker.c

Comments

Eric Biggers Dec. 17, 2020, 7:10 p.m. UTC | #1
On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 09:41:38AM -0800, Chang S. Bae wrote:
> [1] Intel Architecture Instruction Set Extensions Programming Reference:
>     https://software.intel.com/content/dam/develop/external/us/en/documents/architecture-instruction-set-$
> [2] Intel Key Locker Specification:
>     https://software.intel.com/content/dam/develop/external/us/en/documents/343965-intel-key-locker-speci$

Both of these links are broken.

- Eric
Dan Williams Dec. 17, 2020, 8:07 p.m. UTC | #2
On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 11:11 AM Eric Biggers <ebiggers@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 09:41:38AM -0800, Chang S. Bae wrote:
> > [1] Intel Architecture Instruction Set Extensions Programming Reference:
> >     https://software.intel.com/content/dam/develop/external/us/en/documents/architecture-instruction-set-$

https://software.intel.com/content/dam/develop/external/us/en/documents/architecture-instruction-set-extensions-programming-reference.pdf

> > [2] Intel Key Locker Specification:
> >     https://software.intel.com/content/dam/develop/external/us/en/documents/343965-intel-key-locker-speci$

https://software.intel.com/content/dam/develop/external/us/en/documents/343965-intel-key-locker-specification.pdf
Chang S. Bae Dec. 18, 2020, 1:08 a.m. UTC | #3
> On Dec 18, 2020, at 04:10, Eric Biggers <ebiggers@kernel.org> wrote:
> 
> On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 09:41:38AM -0800, Chang S. Bae wrote:
>> [1] Intel Architecture Instruction Set Extensions Programming Reference:
>>    https://software.intel.com/content/dam/develop/external/us/en/documents/architecture-instruction-set-$
>> [2] Intel Key Locker Specification:
>>    https://software.intel.com/content/dam/develop/external/us/en/documents/343965-intel-key-locker-speci$
> 
> Both of these links are broken.

Sorry, my bad -- my editor ate some strings with copy & paste. 

Dan has provided the links already, thank you.

Chang
Andy Lutomirski Dec. 19, 2020, 6:59 p.m. UTC | #4
On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 9:46 AM Chang S. Bae <chang.seok.bae@intel.com> wrote:
>
> Key Locker [1][2] is a new security feature available in new Intel CPUs to
> protect data encryption keys for the Advanced Encryption Standard
> algorithm. The protection limits the amount of time an AES key is exposed
> in memory by sealing a key and referencing it with new AES instructions.

I think some fundamental issues need to be worked out before we can
enable key locker upstream at all.

First, how fast is LOADIWKEY?  Does it depend on the mode?  Is it
credible to context switch the wrapping key?

First, on bare metal, we need to decide whether to use a wrapping key
or a software-provided wrapping key.  Both choices have pros and cons,
and it's not clear to me whether Linux should have a boot-time
parameter, a runtime control, a fixed value, or something else.  If we
use a random key, we need to figure out what to do about S5 and
hibernation.  No matter what we do, we're going to have some issues
with CRIU.

We also need to understand the virtualization situation.  What do we
expect hypervisors to do with Key Locker?  The only obviously
performant way I can see for VMMs to support migration is to use the
same wrapping key fleetwide.  (This is also the only way I can see for
VMMs to manage the wrapping key in a way that a side channel can't
extract it from hypervisor memory.)  But VMMs can't do this without
some degree of cooperation from the guest.  Perhaps we should disable
KL if CPUID.HYPERVISOR is set for now?

It's a shame that the spec seems to have some holes in the key
management mechanisms.  It would be very nice if there was a way to
load IWKey from an SGX enclave, and it would also be nice if there was
a way to load an IWKey that is wrapped by a different key.  Also, for
non-random IWKey values, there doesn't seem to be a way for software
(in an enclave or otherwise) to confirm that it's wrapping an AES key
against a particular wrapping key, which seems to severely limit the
ability to safely provision a new wrapped key at runtime.

--Andy
Chang S. Bae Dec. 22, 2020, 7:03 p.m. UTC | #5
> On Dec 20, 2020, at 03:59, Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org> wrote:
> 
> On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 9:46 AM Chang S. Bae <chang.seok.bae@intel.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Key Locker [1][2] is a new security feature available in new Intel CPUs to
>> protect data encryption keys for the Advanced Encryption Standard
>> algorithm. The protection limits the amount of time an AES key is exposed
>> in memory by sealing a key and referencing it with new AES instructions.
> 
> I think some fundamental issues need to be worked out before we can
> enable key locker upstream at all.
> 
> First, how fast is LOADIWKEY?  Does it depend on the mode?  Is it
> credible to context switch the wrapping key?

I saw it took 110-130 cycles without the hardware rand. But about 25K
cycles with it.

It is not executable in userspace.

> First, on bare metal, we need to decide whether to use a wrapping key
> or a software-provided wrapping key.  Both choices have pros and cons,
> and it's not clear to me whether Linux should have a boot-time
> parameter, a runtime control, a fixed value, or something else.  

It is assumed that all the CPUs need to have the same key loaded (at
boot-time).

I thought the software wrapping key is simple to be loaded. 

With hardware rand, the key value is unknown to software. The key 
needs the backup mechanism to copy it to every CPU.

> If we use a random key, we need to figure out what to do about S5 and
> hibernation.  

It was considered to restore the key from the backup before 
resuming any suspended thread. That’s the case for S3 and S4
(hibernation) sleep states. The system restarts with S5.

> No matter what we do, we're going to have some issues with CRIU.

It looks like the case as long as the wrapping key is not fully 
restored by it.

> We also need to understand the virtualization situation.  What do we
> expect hypervisors to do with Key Locker?  The only obviously
> performant way I can see for VMMs to support migration is to use the
> same wrapping key fleetwide.  (This is also the only way I can see for
> VMMs to manage the wrapping key in a way that a side channel can't
> extract it from hypervisor memory.)  But VMMs can't do this without
> some degree of cooperation from the guest.  Perhaps we should disable
> KL if CPUID.HYPERVISOR is set for now?

This is one of the options we considered too.

> It's a shame that the spec seems to have some holes in the key
> management mechanisms.  It would be very nice if there was a way to
> load IWKey from an SGX enclave, and it would also be nice if there was
> a way to load an IWKey that is wrapped by a different key.  Also, for
> non-random IWKey values, there doesn't seem to be a way for software
> (in an enclave or otherwise) to confirm that it's wrapping an AES key
> against a particular wrapping key, which seems to severely limit the
> ability to safely provision a new wrapped key at runtime.

The current use of the wrapping key is only for an AES key. Maybe the 
feature will be extended in the future.

Thanks,
Chang