lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [May]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: SGX vs LSM (Re: [PATCH v20 00/28] Intel SGX1 support)
On Fri, May 24, 2019 at 12:13 PM Sean Christopherson
<sean.j.christopherson@intel.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, May 24, 2019 at 11:34:32AM -0700, Xing, Cedric wrote:
> > > From: linux-sgx-owner@vger.kernel.org [mailto:linux-sgx-
> > > owner@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Sean Christopherson
> > > Sent: Friday, May 24, 2019 10:55 AM

> I don't see a fundamental difference between having RWX in an enclave and
> RWX in normal memory, either way the process can execute arbitrary code,
> i.e. PROCESS__EXECMEM is appropriate. Yes, an enclave will #UD on certain
> instructions, but that's easily sidestepped by having a trampoline in the
> host (marked RX) and piping arbitrary code into the enclave. Or using
> EEXIT to do a bit of ROP.

There's a difference, albeit a somewhat weak one, if sigstructs are
whitelisted. FILE__EXECMOD on
either /dev/sgx/enclave or on the sigstruct is not an entirely crazy
way to express this.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-05-24 21:31    [W:0.273 / U:0.600 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site