From: Avi Kivity <avi@scylladb.com>
To: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Proposal: CAP_PAYLOAD to reduce Meltdown and Spectre mitigation costs
Date: Sat, 6 Jan 2018 21:33:28 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <a5398c4e-be02-0de6-5c76-c37320011eef@scylladb.com> (raw)
Meltdown and Spectre mitigations focus on protecting the kernel from a
hostile userspace. However, it's not a given that the kernel is the most
important target in the system. It is common in server workloads that a
single userspace application contains the valuable data on a system, and
if it were hostile, the game would already be over, without the need to
compromise the kernel.
In these workloads, a single application performs most system calls, and
so it pays the cost of protection, without benefiting from it directly
(since it is the target, rather than the kernel).
I propose to create a new capability, CAP_PAYLOAD, that allows the
system administrator to designate an application as the main workload in
that system. Other processes (like sshd or monitoring daemons) exist to
support it, and so it makes sense to protect the rest of the system from
their being compromised.
When the kernel switches to user mode of a CAP_PAYLOAD process, it
doesn't switch page tables and instead leaves the kernel mapped into the
adddress space (still with supervisor protection, of course). This
reduces context switch cost, and will also reduce interrupt costs if the
interrupt happens while that process executes. Since a CAP_PAYLOAD
process is likely to consume the majority of CPU time, the costs
associated with Meltdown mitigation are almost completely nullified.
CAP_PAYLOAD has potential to be abused; every software vendor will be
absolutely certain that their application is the reason the universe
(let alone that server) exists and they will turn it on, so init systems
will have to work to make it doesn't get turned on without administrator
opt-in. It's also not perfect, since if there is a payload application
compromise, in addition to stealing the application's data ssh keys can
be stolen too. But I think it's better than having to choose between
significantly reduced performance and security. You get performance for
your important application, and protection against the possibility that
a remote exploit against a supporting process turns into a remote
exploit against that important application.
next reply other threads:[~2018-01-06 19:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-01-06 19:33 Avi Kivity [this message]
2018-01-06 20:02 ` Alan Cox
2018-01-07 9:16 ` Avi Kivity
2018-01-07 12:29 ` Theodore Ts'o
2018-01-07 12:34 ` Ozgur
2018-01-07 12:51 ` Avi Kivity
2018-01-07 18:06 ` Theodore Ts'o
2018-01-06 20:24 ` Willy Tarreau
2018-01-07 9:14 ` Avi Kivity
2018-01-07 17:39 ` Willy Tarreau
2018-01-07 14:36 ` Alan Cox
2018-01-07 15:15 ` Avi Kivity
2018-01-07 17:26 ` Willy Tarreau
2018-01-08 1:33 ` Casey Schaufler
2018-01-18 22:49 ` Pavel Machek
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=a5398c4e-be02-0de6-5c76-c37320011eef@scylladb.com \
--to=avi@scylladb.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®