Hi Folks, I''m developing a secure memory manager module for xen as a part of my academic project. Thereby protecting DomU memory by moving the trust for memory protection from Dom0 to hardware by encrypting/ decrypting the guest memory on per-domain-secret key basis and realizing the same using a crypto coprocessor (FPGA) with necessary software (XEN) hooks and interfaces. Now one of the implementation issues is that how to move the domU memory allocation (both boot pages and application pages) to fall behind the coprocessor by modifying xen source. If so where in the source tree the changes have to be made. I did try modifying common/memory.c : populate_physmap(), but I am afraid this is not the right place. Since I have allocate real memory to domU, I am clueless. I would appreciate you If you could send me your valuable suggestions. Thanks, Dinesh C _________________________________________________________________ Chose your Life Partner! Join MSN Matrimony FREE http://www.in.msn.com/matrimony _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
From: dinesh_chan8@hotmail.com To: michal@rsbac.org Subject: RE: [Xen-devel] Academic Project Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 00:46:01 +0530 Essentially, first step towards minimizing the trusted computing base. Assuming the VMM is not compromised (after a secure boot), domU doesnt have to trust dom0. For example, the following command issued from dom0 would dump the guest memory in dom0 hard disk, xm save Guest guest_mem.dump Using the crypto coprocessor, this can be encrypted, so that only domU can read/write and not dom0. The result of the above command will store an encrypted dump file on the dom0 disk. Thanks, Dinesh C From: michal@rsbac.org To: dinesh_chan8@hotmail.com Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Academic Project Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2009 19:31:32 +0100 And what is the purpose of this?Seems to be trivial to get over it. Sent from my iPhone On Feb 22, 2009, at 6:19 PM, dinesh chandrasekaran <dinesh_chan8@hotmail.com> wrote: Hi Folks, I''m developing a secure memory manager module for xen as a part of my academic project. Thereby protecting DomU memory by moving the trust for memory protection from Dom0 to hardware by encrypting/ decrypting the guest memory on per-domain-secret key basis and realizing the same using a crypto coprocessor (FPGA) with necessary software (XEN) hooks and interfaces. Now one of the implementation issues is that how to move the domU memory allocation (both boot pages and application pages) to fall behind the coprocessor by modifying xen source. If so where in the source tree the changes have to be made. I did try modifying common/memory.c : populate_physmap(), but I am afraid this is not the right place. Since I have allocate real memory to domU, I am clueless. I would appreciate you If you could send me your valuable suggestions. Thanks, Dinesh C Akshay Kumar takes on the two reigning Bollywood Khans. Catch the action on MSN Entertainment! Check it out! _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel Akshay Kumar takes on the two reigning Bollywood Khans. Catch the action on MSN Entertainment! Check it out! _________________________________________________________________ Find a better job. We have plenty. Visit MSN Jobs http://www.in.msn.com/jobs _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
I''m curious about the crypto coprocessor. Does it work like a memory controller? So every memory read/write will be encrypted/decrypted by it? Thanks, Weiming On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 10:31 AM, dinesh chandrasekaran < dinesh_chan8@hotmail.com> wrote:> > > ------------------------------ > From: dinesh_chan8@hotmail.com > To: michal@rsbac.org > Subject: RE: [Xen-devel] Academic Project > Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 00:46:01 +0530 > > Essentially, first step towards minimizing the trusted computing base. > > Assuming the VMM is not compromised (after a secure boot), domU doesnt have > to trust dom0. > > For example, the following command issued from dom0 would dump the guest > memory in dom0 hard disk, > xm save Guest guest_mem.dump > > Using the crypto coprocessor, this can be encrypted, so that only domU can > read/write and not dom0. > The result of the above command will store an encrypted dump file on the > dom0 disk. > > Thanks, > Dinesh C > ------------------------------ > From: michal@rsbac.org > To: dinesh_chan8@hotmail.com > Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Academic Project > Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2009 19:31:32 +0100 > > And what is the purpose of this? > Seems to be trivial to get over it. > > Sent from my iPhone > > On Feb 22, 2009, at 6:19 PM, dinesh chandrasekaran < > dinesh_chan8@hotmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Folks, > I''m developing a secure memory manager module for xen as a > part of my academic project. > Thereby protecting DomU memory by moving the trust for memory protection > from Dom0 to hardware by encrypting/ > decrypting the guest memory on per-domain-secret key basis and realizing > the same using a crypto coprocessor (FPGA) > with necessary software (XEN) hooks and interfaces. > > Now one of the implementation issues is that how to move the domU memory > allocation (both boot pages and application pages) > to fall behind the coprocessor by modifying xen source. If so where in the > source tree the changes have to be made. > > I did try modifying common/memory.c : populate_physmap(), but I am afraid > this is not the right place. > Since I have allocate real memory to domU, I am clueless. > > I would appreciate you If you could send me your valuable suggestions. > > Thanks, > Dinesh C > > ------------------------------ > Akshay Kumar takes on the two reigning Bollywood Khans. Catch the action on > MSN Entertainment! Check it out! <http://entertainment.in.msn.com> > > _______________________________________________ > Xen-devel mailing list > Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com > http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel > > > ------------------------------ > Akshay Kumar takes on the two reigning Bollywood Khans. Catch the action on > MSN Entertainment! Check it out! <http://entertainment.in.msn.com> > ------------------------------ > Get a view of the world through MSN Video. Some things just cannot be left > unseen. Try it! <http://video.msn.com/?mkt=en-in> > > _______________________________________________ > Xen-devel mailing list > Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com > http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel > >_______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
Yes. It will appear to be another PCI device sitting between the CPU and guest memory. To achieve this I need to make sure that xen allocates guest memory from memory behind the crypto coprocessor. This is the implementation issue I need to solve to get the project going. I did try modifying common/memory.c : populate_physmap(), but I am afraid this is not the right place. Since I have allocate real memory to domU, I am clueless. Thanks, Dinesh C Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 10:44:34 -0500 Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Academic Project From: zephyr.zhao@gmail.com To: dinesh_chan8@hotmail.com CC: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com I''m curious about the crypto coprocessor. Does it work like a memory controller? So every memory read/write will be encrypted/decrypted by it? Thanks, Weiming On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 10:31 AM, dinesh chandrasekaran <dinesh_chan8@hotmail.com> wrote: From: dinesh_chan8@hotmail.com To: michal@rsbac.org Subject: RE: [Xen-devel] Academic Project Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 00:46:01 +0530 Essentially, first step towards minimizing the trusted computing base. Assuming the VMM is not compromised (after a secure boot), domU doesnt have to trust dom0. For example, the following command issued from dom0 would dump the guest memory in dom0 hard disk, xm save Guest guest_mem.dump Using the crypto coprocessor, this can be encrypted, so that only domU can read/write and not dom0. The result of the above command will store an encrypted dump file on the dom0 disk. Thanks, Dinesh C From: michal@rsbac.org To: dinesh_chan8@hotmail.com Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Academic Project Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2009 19:31:32 +0100 And what is the purpose of this?Seems to be trivial to get over it. Sent from my iPhone On Feb 22, 2009, at 6:19 PM, dinesh chandrasekaran <dinesh_chan8@hotmail.com> wrote: Hi Folks, I''m developing a secure memory manager module for xen as a part of my academic project. Thereby protecting DomU memory by moving the trust for memory protection from Dom0 to hardware by encrypting/ decrypting the guest memory on per-domain-secret key basis and realizing the same using a crypto coprocessor (FPGA) with necessary software (XEN) hooks and interfaces. Now one of the implementation issues is that how to move the domU memory allocation (both boot pages and application pages) to fall behind the coprocessor by modifying xen source. If so where in the source tree the changes have to be made. I did try modifying common/memory.c : populate_physmap(), but I am afraid this is not the right place. Since I have allocate real memory to domU, I am clueless. I would appreciate you If you could send me your valuable suggestions. Thanks, Dinesh C Akshay Kumar takes on the two reigning Bollywood Khans. Catch the action on MSN Entertainment! Check it out! _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel Akshay Kumar takes on the two reigning Bollywood Khans. Catch the action on MSN Entertainment! Check it out! Get a view of the world through MSN Video. Some things just cannot be left unseen. Try it! _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel _________________________________________________________________ Chose your Life Partner! Join MSN Matrimony FREE http://www.in.msn.com/matrimony _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
One more thing is that the device should be able to tell if the access is from the owner of protected domain or from others (like dom0). If the dom0 is compromised, it may mimic the request from that domU. Weiming On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 11:07 AM, dinesh chandrasekaran < dinesh_chan8@hotmail.com> wrote:> Yes. It will appear to be another PCI device sitting between the CPU and > guest memory. > > To achieve this I need to make sure that xen allocates guest memory from > memory behind the crypto coprocessor. > This is the implementation issue I need to solve to get the project going. > > I did try modifying common/memory.c : populate_physmap(), but I am afraid > this is not the right place. > Since I have allocate real memory to domU, I am clueless. > > Thanks, > Dinesh C > ------------------------------ > Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 10:44:34 -0500 > Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Academic Project > From: zephyr.zhao@gmail.com > To: dinesh_chan8@hotmail.com > CC: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com > > > I''m curious about the crypto coprocessor. Does it work like a memory > controller? So every memory read/write will be encrypted/decrypted by it? > > Thanks, > Weiming > > On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 10:31 AM, dinesh chandrasekaran < > dinesh_chan8@hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > ------------------------------ > From: dinesh_chan8@hotmail.com > To: michal@rsbac.org > Subject: RE: [Xen-devel] Academic Project > Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 00:46:01 +0530 > > Essentially, first step towards minimizing the trusted computing base. > > Assuming the VMM is not compromised (after a secure boot), domU doesnt have > to trust dom0. > > For example, the following command issued from dom0 would dump the guest > memory in dom0 hard disk, > xm save Guest guest_mem.dump > > Using the crypto coprocessor, this can be encrypted, so that only domU can > read/write and not dom0. > The result of the above command will store an encrypted dump file on the > dom0 disk. > > Thanks, > Dinesh C > ------------------------------ > From: michal@rsbac.org > To: dinesh_chan8@hotmail.com > Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Academic Project > Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2009 19:31:32 +0100 > > And what is the purpose of this? > Seems to be trivial to get over it. > > Sent from my iPhone > > On Feb 22, 2009, at 6:19 PM, dinesh chandrasekaran < > dinesh_chan8@hotmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Folks, > I''m developing a secure memory manager module for xen as a > part of my academic project. > Thereby protecting DomU memory by moving the trust for memory protection > from Dom0 to hardware by encrypting/ > decrypting the guest memory on per-domain-secret key basis and realizing > the same using a crypto coprocessor (FPGA) > with necessary software (XEN) hooks and interfaces. > > Now one of the implementation issues is that how to move the domU memory > allocation (both boot pages and application pages) > to fall behind the coprocessor by modifying xen source. If so where in the > source tree the changes have to be made. > > I did try modifying common/memory.c : populate_physmap(), but I am afraid > this is not the right place. > Since I have allocate real memory to domU, I am clueless. > > I would appreciate you If you could send me your valuable suggestions. > > Thanks, > Dinesh C > > ------------------------------ > Akshay Kumar takes on the two reigning Bollywood Khans. Catch the action on > MSN Entertainment! Check it out! <http://entertainment.in.msn.com> > > _______________________________________________ > Xen-devel mailing list > Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com > http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel > > > ------------------------------ > Akshay Kumar takes on the two reigning Bollywood Khans. Catch the action on > MSN Entertainment! Check it out! <http://entertainment.in.msn.com> > ------------------------------ > Get a view of the world through MSN Video. Some things just cannot be left > unseen. Try it! <http://video.msn.com/?mkt=en-in> > > _______________________________________________ > Xen-devel mailing list > Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com > http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel > > > > ------------------------------ > Akshay Kumar takes on the two reigning Bollywood Khans. Catch the action on > MSN Entertainment! Check it out! <http://entertainment.in.msn.com> > > _______________________________________________ > Xen-devel mailing list > Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com > http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel > >_______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
Absolutly. This could be achieved through xen hooks which informs the device about the currently scheduled domain. This would prevent the guest memory from compromised dom0. Dinesh C Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 11:16:22 -0500 Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Academic Project From: zephyr.zhao@gmail.com To: dinesh_chan8@hotmail.com One more thing is that the device should be able to tell if the access is from the owner of protected domain or from others (like dom0). If the dom0 is compromised, it may mimic the request from that domU. Weiming On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 11:07 AM, dinesh chandrasekaran <dinesh_chan8@hotmail.com> wrote: Yes. It will appear to be another PCI device sitting between the CPU and guest memory. To achieve this I need to make sure that xen allocates guest memory from memory behind the crypto coprocessor. This is the implementation issue I need to solve to get the project going. I did try modifying common/memory.c : populate_physmap(), but I am afraid this is not the right place. Since I have allocate real memory to domU, I am clueless. Thanks, Dinesh C Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 10:44:34 -0500 Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Academic Project From: zephyr.zhao@gmail.com To: dinesh_chan8@hotmail.com CC: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com I''m curious about the crypto coprocessor. Does it work like a memory controller? So every memory read/write will be encrypted/decrypted by it? Thanks, Weiming On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 10:31 AM, dinesh chandrasekaran <dinesh_chan8@hotmail.com> wrote: From: dinesh_chan8@hotmail.com To: michal@rsbac.org Subject: RE: [Xen-devel] Academic Project Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 00:46:01 +0530 Essentially, first step towards minimizing the trusted computing base. Assuming the VMM is not compromised (after a secure boot), domU doesnt have to trust dom0. For example, the following command issued from dom0 would dump the guest memory in dom0 hard disk, xm save Guest guest_mem.dump Using the crypto coprocessor, this can be encrypted, so that only domU can read/write and not dom0. The result of the above command will store an encrypted dump file on the dom0 disk. Thanks, Dinesh C From: michal@rsbac.org To: dinesh_chan8@hotmail.com Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Academic Project Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2009 19:31:32 +0100 And what is the purpose of this?Seems to be trivial to get over it. Sent from my iPhone On Feb 22, 2009, at 6:19 PM, dinesh chandrasekaran <dinesh_chan8@hotmail.com> wrote: Hi Folks, I''m developing a secure memory manager module for xen as a part of my academic project. Thereby protecting DomU memory by moving the trust for memory protection from Dom0 to hardware by encrypting/ decrypting the guest memory on per-domain-secret key basis and realizing the same using a crypto coprocessor (FPGA) with necessary software (XEN) hooks and interfaces. Now one of the implementation issues is that how to move the domU memory allocation (both boot pages and application pages) to fall behind the coprocessor by modifying xen source. If so where in the source tree the changes have to be made. I did try modifying common/memory.c : populate_physmap(), but I am afraid this is not the right place. Since I have allocate real memory to domU, I am clueless. I would appreciate you If you could send me your valuable suggestions. Thanks, Dinesh C Akshay Kumar takes on the two reigning Bollywood Khans. Catch the action on MSN Entertainment! Check it out! _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel Akshay Kumar takes on the two reigning Bollywood Khans. Catch the action on MSN Entertainment! Check it out! Get a view of the world through MSN Video. Some things just cannot be left unseen. Try it! _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel Akshay Kumar takes on the two reigning Bollywood Khans. Catch the action on MSN Entertainment! Check it out! _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel Rediscover the magic of Windows & WIN a Windows Vista laptop & Windows mobile phone at www.windowsandme.com Try it now! _________________________________________________________________ Wish to Marry Now? Join MSN Matrimony FREE! http://www.in.msn.com/matrimony _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
Can some one tell me how to go about achieving this. How to allocate real memory (which is behind a PCI device) to guests? I need to modify Xen source to achieve the above. where exactly in the source I should do so? Thanks, Dinesh C From: dinesh_chan8@hotmail.com To: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com Subject: [Xen-devel] Academic Project Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 22:11:53 +0530 Absolutly. This could be achieved through xen hooks which informs the device about the currently scheduled domain. This would prevent the guest memory from compromised dom0. Dinesh C Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 11:16:22 -0500 Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Academic Project From: zephyr.zhao@gmail.com To: dinesh_chan8@hotmail.com One more thing is that the device should be able to tell if the access is from the owner of protected domain or from others (like dom0). If the dom0 is compromised, it may mimic the request from that domU. Weiming On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 11:07 AM, dinesh chandrasekaran <dinesh_chan8@hotmail.com> wrote: Yes. It will appear to be another PCI device sitting between the CPU and guest memory. To achieve this I need to make sure that xen allocates guest memory from memory behind the crypto coprocessor. This is the implementation issue I need to solve to get the project going. I did try modifying common/memory.c : populate_physmap(), but I am afraid this is not the right place. Since I have allocate real memory to domU, I am clueless. Thanks, Dinesh C Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 10:44:34 -0500 Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Academic Project From: zephyr.zhao@gmail.com To: dinesh_chan8@hotmail.com CC: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com I''m curious about the crypto coprocessor. Does it work like a memory controller? So every memory read/write will be encrypted/decrypted by it? Thanks, Weiming On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 10:31 AM, dinesh chandrasekaran <dinesh_chan8@hotmail.com> wrote: From: dinesh_chan8@hotmail.com To: michal@rsbac.org Subject: RE: [Xen-devel] Academic Project Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 00:46:01 +0530 Essentially, first step towards minimizing the trusted computing base. Assuming the VMM is not compromised (after a secure boot), domU doesnt have to trust dom0. For example, the following command issued from dom0 would dump the guest memory in dom0 hard disk, xm save Guest guest_mem.dump Using the crypto coprocessor, this can be encrypted, so that only domU can read/write and not dom0. The result of the above command will store an encrypted dump file on the dom0 disk. Thanks, Dinesh C From: michal@rsbac.org To: dinesh_chan8@hotmail.com Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Academic Project Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2009 19:31:32 +0100 And what is the purpose of this?Seems to be trivial to get over it. Sent from my iPhone On Feb 22, 2009, at 6:19 PM, dinesh chandrasekaran <dinesh_chan8@hotmail.com> wrote: Hi Folks, I''m developing a secure memory manager module for xen as a part of my academic project. Thereby protecting DomU memory by moving the trust for memory protection from Dom0 to hardware by encrypting/ decrypting the guest memory on per-domain-secret key basis and realizing the same using a crypto coprocessor (FPGA) with necessary software (XEN) hooks and interfaces. Now one of the implementation issues is that how to move the domU memory allocation (both boot pages and application pages) to fall behind the coprocessor by modifying xen source. If so where in the source tree the changes have to be made. I did try modifying common/memory.c : populate_physmap(), but I am afraid this is not the right place. Since I have allocate real memory to domU, I am clueless. I would appreciate you If you could send me your valuable suggestions. Thanks, Dinesh C Akshay Kumar takes on the two reigning Bollywood Khans. Catch the action on MSN Entertainment! Check it out! _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel Akshay Kumar takes on the two reigning Bollywood Khans. Catch the action on MSN Entertainment! Check it out! Get a view of the world through MSN Video. Some things just cannot be left unseen. Try it! _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel Akshay Kumar takes on the two reigning Bollywood Khans. Catch the action on MSN Entertainment! Check it out! _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel Rediscover the magic of Windows & WIN a Windows Vista laptop & Windows mobile phone at www.windowsandme.com Try it now! Need more space to upload pictures? Get 25 GB online storage with Windows Live SkyDrive! Try it! _________________________________________________________________ Express your true emotions! Send a virtual kiss! Do all these cool stuff & more with Windows Live Messenger. Download here http://www.windowslive.com/Desktop/Messenger _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
I''m absolutely not sure I follow what you are trying to do, but if what you want to do is "hide" a device in a particular domain, and give the memory "behind" that device to the domain, then that is not likely to work. You can only "get to" memory hidden behind a PCI device if you can turn the PCI device off. Turning the device off is of course a valid option if the device is not needed at all by the system. If it is needed, then you have no option but to leave it enabled, and the physical memory behind the device will be hidden by the PCI device. There are certain memory controller chipsets (e.g. the memory controller integrated into the Athlon64/Opteron/etc models after Rev E or so) that have "hidden memory hoisting", which essentially means that you can tell the memory controller that "take the memory behind the PCI device in this range, and move it up a bit", which means that if you have (say) 4GB of RAM, and a PCI bus hole of 768MB, the system will appear to have memory from 0-3.25GB, then PCI devices for 0.75GB, and then another 0.75GB of RAM. -- Mats At 19:54 03/03/2009, dinesh chandrasekaran wrote:>Can some one tell me how to go about achieving this. > >How to allocate real memory (which is behind a PCI device) to guests? >I need to modify Xen source to achieve the above. >where exactly in the source I should do so? > >Thanks, >Dinesh C > >---------- >From: dinesh_chan8@hotmail.com >To: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com >Subject: [Xen-devel] Academic Project >Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 22:11:53 +0530 > > >Absolutly. This could be achieved through xen hooks which informs >the device about the currently scheduled domain. >This would prevent the guest memory from compromised dom0. > >Dinesh C > >---------- >Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 11:16:22 -0500 >Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Academic Project >From: zephyr.zhao@gmail.com >To: dinesh_chan8@hotmail.com > >One more thing is that the device should be able to tell if the >access is from the owner of protected domain or from others (like >dom0). If the dom0 is compromised, it may mimic the request from that domU. > >Weiming > >On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 11:07 AM, dinesh chandrasekaran ><<mailto:dinesh_chan8@hotmail.com>dinesh_chan8@hotmail.com> wrote: >Yes. It will appear to be another PCI device sitting between the CPU >and guest memory. > >To achieve this I need to make sure that xen allocates guest memory >from memory behind the crypto coprocessor. >This is the implementation issue I need to solve to get the project going. > > >I did try modifying common/memory.c : populate_physmap(), but I am >afraid this is not the right place. >Since I have allocate real memory to domU, I am clueless. > >Thanks, >Dinesh C > >---------- >Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 10:44:34 -0500 > >Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Academic Project >From: <mailto:zephyr.zhao@gmail.com>zephyr.zhao@gmail.com > >To: <mailto:dinesh_chan8@hotmail.com>dinesh_chan8@hotmail.com >CC: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>xen-devel@lists.xensource.com > > >I''m curious about the crypto coprocessor. Does it work like a memory >controller? So every memory read/write will be encrypted/decrypted by it? > >Thanks, >Weiming > >On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 10:31 AM, dinesh chandrasekaran ><<mailto:dinesh_chan8@hotmail.com>dinesh_chan8@hotmail.com> wrote: > > > >---------- >From: <mailto:dinesh_chan8@hotmail.com>dinesh_chan8@hotmail.com >To: <mailto:michal@rsbac.org>michal@rsbac.org >Subject: RE: [Xen-devel] Academic Project >Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 00:46:01 +0530 > >Essentially, first step towards minimizing the trusted computing base. > >Assuming the VMM is not compromised (after a secure boot), domU >doesnt have to trust dom0. > >For example, the following command issued from dom0 would dump the >guest memory in dom0 hard disk, > xm save Guest guest_mem.dump > >Using the crypto coprocessor, this can be encrypted, so that only >domU can read/write and not dom0. >The result of the above command will store an encrypted dump file on >the dom0 disk. > >Thanks, >Dinesh C > >---------- >From: <mailto:michal@rsbac.org>michal@rsbac.org >To: <mailto:dinesh_chan8@hotmail.com>dinesh_chan8@hotmail.com >Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Academic Project >Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2009 19:31:32 +0100 > >And what is the purpose of this? >Seems to be trivial to get over it. > >Sent from my iPhone > >On Feb 22, 2009, at 6:19 PM, dinesh chandrasekaran ><<mailto:dinesh_chan8@hotmail.com>dinesh_chan8@hotmail.com> wrote: > >Hi Folks, > I''m developing a secure memory manager module for > xen as a part of my academic project. > Thereby protecting DomU memory by moving the trust for memory > protection from Dom0 to hardware by encrypting/ > decrypting the guest memory on per-domain-secret key basis and > realizing the same using a crypto coprocessor (FPGA) > with necessary software (XEN) hooks and interfaces. > > Now one of the implementation issues is that how to move the domU > memory allocation (both boot pages and application pages) > to fall behind the coprocessor by modifying xen source. If so > where in the source tree the changes have to be made. > > I did try modifying common/memory.c : populate_physmap(), but I am > afraid this is not the right place. > Since I have allocate real memory to domU, I am clueless. > > I would appreciate you If you could send me your valuable suggestions. > >Thanks, >Dinesh C > > >---------- >Akshay Kumar takes on the two reigning Bollywood Khans. Catch the >action on MSN Entertainment! <http://entertainment.in.msn.com>Check it out! > >_______________________________________________ >Xen-devel mailing list ><mailto:Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com >http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel > > > >---------- >Akshay Kumar takes on the two reigning Bollywood Khans. Catch the >action on MSN Entertainment! <http://entertainment.in.msn.com>Check it out! > >---------- >Get a view of the world through MSN Video. Some things just cannot >be left unseen. <http://video.msn.com/?mkt=en-in>Try it! > >_______________________________________________ >Xen-devel mailing list ><mailto:Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com >http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel > > > > >---------- >Akshay Kumar takes on the two reigning Bollywood Khans. Catch the >action on MSN Entertainment! <http://entertainment.in.msn.com>Check it out! > >_______________________________________________ >Xen-devel mailing list ><mailto:Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com >http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel > > > > >---------- >Rediscover the magic of Windows & WIN a Windows Vista laptop & >Windows mobile phone at www.windowsandme.com ><http://www.windowsandme.com>Try it now! > >---------- >Need more space to upload pictures? Get 25 GB online storage with >Windows Live SkyDrive! <http://windowslive.com/Online/SkyDrive>Try it! > >---------- >Keep an eye on the world around you and on the bigger picture, ><http://news.in.msn.com/>Try it now! >_______________________________________________ >Xen-devel mailing list >Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com >http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel_______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
On Wed, Mar 04, 2009 at 01:24:46AM +0530, dinesh chandrasekaran wrote:> Can some one tell me how to go about achieving this.First: I''m sorry, but i''m pretty sure that what you want to do... will never work in a "normal" computer. IMO the dom0 usually can access everything and all hardware, but it does not matter as soon as it can access some hardware that can do DMA an attacker may find an attack vector. And i also don''t see any application, why should the hypervisor be trusted, but not the dom0?> How to allocate real memory (which is behind a PCI device) to guests? > I need to modify Xen source to achieve the above.You want map memory from a PCI device in the address room? That is no problem, despite that the maximum bar size (that will work on many systems) is 256 MB (i have seen a single system were 1 GB was working, probably there are others, no idea) And by PIO reading you''ll get like 10-20 MB/s or something like that. Anyway (shameless plug) for such low level stuff i would not suggest to use PCI, but a real interface like HyperTransport. There is a HTX board, that offers advantages compared to a PCI board. http://ra.ziti.uni-heidelberg.de/index.php?page=projects&id=htx Christian _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
And i also don''t see any application, why should the hypervisor be trusted, but not the dom0? I claim that the purpose of the proposed technique is due to the following reasons. 1) dom0 is another linux kernel which runs in ring 3 (IA64) along with other guests with more privileges. 2) It runs the management tools (xm) which is the point of user interaction for desktop virtualization. Hence the goal is to protect the guest memory/state from compromised dom0. By the way, I''m sorry I use PCIe board and not PCI . regards, Dinesh C> Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2009 23:54:12 +0100 > From: christian@leber.de > To: dinesh_chan8@hotmail.com > Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Academic Project > CC: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com > > On Wed, Mar 04, 2009 at 01:24:46AM +0530, dinesh chandrasekaran wrote: > > Can some one tell me how to go about achieving this. > > First: I''m sorry, but i''m pretty sure that what you want to do... will > never work in a "normal" computer. > IMO the dom0 usually can access everything and all hardware, but it does > not matter as soon as it can access some hardware that can do DMA an > attacker may find an attack vector. > > And i also don''t see any application, why should the hypervisor be > trusted, but not the dom0? > > > How to allocate real memory (which is behind a PCI device) to guests? > > I need to modify Xen source to achieve the above. > > You want map memory from a PCI device in the address room? > > That is no problem, despite that the maximum bar size (that will work on > many systems) is 256 MB (i have seen a single system were 1 GB was > working, probably there are others, no idea) > And by PIO reading you''ll get like 10-20 MB/s or something like that. > > > Anyway (shameless plug) for such low level stuff i would not suggest to > use PCI, but a real interface like HyperTransport. > > There is a HTX board, that offers advantages compared to a PCI board. > http://ra.ziti.uni-heidelberg.de/index.php?page=projects&id=htx > > > Christian > > > _______________________________________________ > Xen-devel mailing list > Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com > http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel_________________________________________________________________ Ready for MARRIAGE? Join MSN Matrimony! http://www.shaadi.com/msn/matrimony.php?ptnr=msnhottag _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
On Wed, Mar 04, 2009 at 06:00:40AM +0530, dinesh chandrasekaran wrote: Hi dinesh> 1) dom0 is another linux kernel which runs in ring 3 (IA64) along with > other guests with more privileges. > 2) It runs the management tools (xm) which is the point of user > interaction for desktop virtualization. > Hence the goal is to protect the guest memory/state from compromised dom0.That implies the protection hardware is not controlled by the dom0 and there is another more secure way for the administration of it and second that the dom0 can''t do anything. The dom0 can afaik do basically anything, so it also can claim "i''m secure domU No. 2 and i want my data!", furthermore the dom0 should also be able to overwrite the xen kernel.> By the way, I''m sorry I use PCIe board and not PCI .Does not matter, it has the same latency, you''ll get 10-20 MB/s memory performance. Christian _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
Christian,> That implies the protection hardware is not controlled by the dom0 and > there is another more secure way for the administration of it and second > that the dom0 can''t do anything.Absolutely. You are correct.> The dom0 can afaik do basically anything, so it also can claim "i''m > secure domU No. 2 and i want my data!", furthermore the dom0 should also be > able to overwrite the xen kernel.I guess the domain scheduling is done by the VMM and not by dom0? Through VMM Hooks, the VMM is made to inform the device about the domain scheduled to run. So dom0 cannot claim to be any domU.> furthermore the dom0 should also be able to overwrite the xen kernel.Can you throw some lights on the above "overwriting the xen kernel by dom0"? regards, Dinesh C> Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 01:55:36 +0100 > From: christian@leber.de > To: dinesh_chan8@hotmail.com > CC: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com > Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Academic Project > > On Wed, Mar 04, 2009 at 06:00:40AM +0530, dinesh chandrasekaran wrote: > > Hi dinesh > > > 1) dom0 is another linux kernel which runs in ring 3 (IA64) along with > > other guests with more privileges. > > 2) It runs the management tools (xm) which is the point of user > > interaction for desktop virtualization. > > Hence the goal is to protect the guest memory/state from compromised dom0. > > That implies the protection hardware is not controlled by the dom0 and > there is another more secure way for the administration of it and second > that the dom0 can''t do anything. > > The dom0 can afaik do basically anything, so it also can claim "i''m > secure domU No. 2 and i want my data!", furthermore the dom0 should also be > able to overwrite the xen kernel. > > > By the way, I''m sorry I use PCIe board and not PCI . > > Does not matter, it has the same latency, you''ll get 10-20 MB/s memory > performance. > > > Christian_________________________________________________________________ Property Requirements? Available on MSN Real Estate http://www.makaan.com/msn/real-estate.php?ptnr=mk0113 _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
Xia, Liangfu
2009-Mar-04 05:15 UTC
[Xen-devel] Volume group "VolGroup00" not found when I boot xen
Hi, Does anyone meet the problem above? My boot options: tttle xen-3.3.1 root (hd0,0) kernel /xen-3.3..1.gx module /vimlinuz-2.6.18.8-xen ro root=/dev/VolGroup00/LogVol00 rhgb quiet module /initrd-2.6.18.8-xen.img All the required files are present in /boot, but it still can''t work:( Can anyone help me with this problem? Thanks _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
Masaki Kanno
2009-Mar-04 05:49 UTC
Re: [Xen-devel] Volume group "VolGroup00" not found when I boot xen
Wed, 4 Mar 2009 13:15:24 +0800, "Xia, Liangfu" wrote:>Hi, > Does anyone meet the problem above? > My boot options: > tttle xen-3.3.1typo? tttle -> title Thanks Kan> root (hd0,0) > kernel /xen-3.3..1.gx > module /vimlinuz-2.6.18.8-xen ro root=/dev/ >VolGroup00/LogVol00 rhgb quiet > module /initrd-2.6.18.8-xen.img > > All the required files are present in /boot, but it still can''t >work:( > Can anyone help me with this problem? >Thanks > >-------------------------------text/plain------------------------------- >_______________________________________________ >Xen-devel mailing list >Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com >http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel_______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
Xia, Liangfu
2009-Mar-04 06:06 UTC
RE: [Xen-devel] Volume group "VolGroup00" not found when I boot xen
Sorry, it is title. When I write this mail, I make this mistake. Do you have any ideas about it? Thanks -----Original Message----- From: Masaki Kanno [mailto:kanno.masaki@jp.fujitsu.com] Sent: 2009年3月4日 13:50 To: Xia, Liangfu; xen developers community Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Volume group "VolGroup00" not found when I boot xen Wed, 4 Mar 2009 13:15:24 +0800, "Xia, Liangfu" wrote:>Hi, > Does anyone meet the problem above? > My boot options: > tttle xen-3.3.1typo? tttle -> title Thanks Kan> root (hd0,0) > kernel /xen-3.3..1.gx > module /vimlinuz-2.6.18.8-xen ro root=/dev/ >VolGroup00/LogVol00 rhgb quiet > module /initrd-2.6.18.8-xen.img > > All the required files are present in /boot, but it still can't >work:( > Can anyone help me with this problem? >Thanks > >-------------------------------text/plain------------------------------- >_______________________________________________ >Xen-devel mailing list >Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com >http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel_______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
M A Young
2009-Mar-04 08:36 UTC
Re: [Xen-devel] Volume group "VolGroup00" not found when I boot xen
On Wed, 4 Mar 2009, Xia, Liangfu wrote:> > Hi, > > Does anyone meet the problem above? > > My boot options: > > tttle xen-3.3.1 > > root (hd0,0) > > kernel /xen-3.3..1.gx > > module /vimlinuz-2.6.18.8-xen ro > root=/dev/VolGroup00/LogVol00 rhgb quiet > > module /initrd-2.6.18.8-xen.img > > > > All the required files are present in /boot, but it still can?t > workL > > Can anyone help me with this problem?"VolGroup00 not found" may simply mean that the kernel can''t see the hard disk because some required modules are missing from the initrd and VolGroup00 is simply the first thing to complain about it. Of course the missing modules could also be the lvm related ones. Michael Young _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
On Wed, Mar 04, 2009 at 08:25:49AM +0530, dinesh chandrasekaran wrote: Hi dinesh> > That implies the protection hardware is not controlled by the dom0 and > > there is another more secure way for the administration of it and second > > that the dom0 can''t do anything. > > Absolutely. You are correct.Ok, so how do you plan to do this and why is this supposed to be more secure?> I guess the domain scheduling is done by the VMM and not by dom0? > Through VMM Hooks, the VMM is made to inform the device about the domain > scheduled to run. > So dom0 cannot claim to be any domU.I''m not really sure, but i think the dom0 can access the complete system memory. If not, then it controls at least some hardware that can do DMA and can this way access all the memory. -> dom0 can write/read all memory -> it can do anything> > furthermore the dom0 should also be able to overwrite the xen kernel. > > Can you throw some lights on the above "overwriting the xen kernel by > dom0"?A compromised dom0 could just replace the xen kernel/hypervisor on disk and/or in memory. Your idea just has so many problems, like what are you doing to do about disk i/o? Christian _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
Boris Derzhavets
2009-Mar-04 09:11 UTC
Re: [Xen-devel] Volume group "VolGroup00" not found when I boot xen
/xen-3.3..1.gz--- On Wed, 3/4/09, M A Young <m.a.young@durham.ac.uk> wrote: From: M A Young <m.a.young@durham.ac.uk> Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Volume group "VolGroup00" not found when I boot xen To: "Xia, Liangfu" <liangfu.xia@intel.com> Cc: "xen developers community" <xen-devel@lists.xensource.com> Date: Wednesday, March 4, 2009, 3:36 AM On Wed, 4 Mar 2009, Xia, Liangfu wrote:> > Hi, > > Does anyone meet the problem above? > > My boot options: > > tttle xen-3.3.1 > > root (hd0,0) > > kernel/xen-3.3..1.gx> > module/vimlinuz-2.6.18.8-xen ro> root=/dev/VolGroup00/LogVol00 rhgb quiet > > module/initrd-2.6.18.8-xen.img> > > > All the required files are present in /boot, but it stillcan?t> workL > > Can anyone help me with this problem?"VolGroup00 not found" may simply mean that the kernel can''t see the hard disk because some required modules are missing from the initrd and VolGroup00 is simply the first thing to complain about it. Of course the missing modules could also be the lvm related ones. Michael Young_______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
Christian, Xen talks to the protection hardware behind which all the guest memory exists. This is more secure because, now if do the following you cannot extract any useful information 1) xm save Guest guest.dump (assuming a guest named "Guest" is already running) this would dump the guest memory into a file in the dom0 disk. 2) Strings on guest.dump Since this guest.dump is encrypted by the protection hardware, and Xen just informed that "dom0 is running", the encypted memory will only be released to dom0. This will be dumped into s file in dom0 disk.> If not, then it controls at least some hardware that can do DMA > and can this way access all the memory.You are correct. I will have to figure out a way in future to protect against such type of DMA attacks.> A compromised dom0 could just replace the xen kernel/hypervisor on disk and/or in memory.I think the secure boot using TPM would solve this issue of booting up a "replaced" xen kernel. This project is just a prototype and I will have to work more to resolve all issues. Thanks so much for your suggestions. regards, Dinesh C> Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 09:45:58 +0100 > From: christian@leber.de > To: dinesh_chan8@hotmail.com > Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Academic Project > CC: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com > > On Wed, Mar 04, 2009 at 08:25:49AM +0530, dinesh chandrasekaran wrote: > > Hi dinesh > > > > That implies the protection hardware is not controlled by the dom0 and > > > there is another more secure way for the administration of it and second > > > that the dom0 can''t do anything. > > > > Absolutely. You are correct. > > Ok, so how do you plan to do this and why is this supposed to be more > secure? > > > I guess the domain scheduling is done by the VMM and not by dom0? > > Through VMM Hooks, the VMM is made to inform the device about the domain > > scheduled to run. > > So dom0 cannot claim to be any domU. > > I''m not really sure, but i think the dom0 can access the complete system > memory. If not, then it controls at least some hardware that can do DMA > and can this way access all the memory. > > -> dom0 can write/read all memory -> it can do anything > > > > furthermore the dom0 should also be able to overwrite the xen kernel. > > > > Can you throw some lights on the above "overwriting the xen kernel by > > dom0"? > > A compromised dom0 could just replace the xen kernel/hypervisor on disk and/or in > memory. > > Your idea just has so many problems, like what are you doing to do about disk i/o? > > > Christian > > > _______________________________________________ > Xen-devel mailing list > Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com > http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel_________________________________________________________________ Ready for MARRIAGE? Join MSN Matrimony! http://www.shaadi.com/msn/matrimony.php?ptnr=msnhottag _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
On Wed, Mar 04, 2009 at 10:11:41PM +0530, dinesh chandrasekaran wrote: Hi dinesh> Xen talks to the protection hardware behind which all the guest memory > exists.The memory is mapped. And i was wrong, the dom0 can''t just access all memory in the system.> This is more secure because, > now if do the following you cannot extract any useful information > 1) xm save Guest guest.dump (assuming a guest named "Guest" is already > running) > this would dump the guest memory into a file in the dom0 disk. > 2) Strings on guest.dumpSo encrypt it in the Xen kernel.> Since this guest.dump is encrypted by the protection hardware, and Xen > just informed that "dom0 is running",That assumes that the dom0 always has to run alone on the machine, in 2009 the minimum server has 8 cores (next year 12) and often more.> the encypted memory will only be released to dom0. This will be dumped > into s file in dom0 disk.Ok, so by taking a step back and looking at the problem again, i think you are basically facing two possibilities: 1.) The security of the Xen kernel is brocken -> You are lost, your hardware can''t protect anything. 2.) The security of the Xen kernel is not brocke -> Why on earth hardware? What you can do in Verilog on an FPGA, can be done much more conveniently in C in the Xen kernel. (Don''t get me wrong, I''m all pro building hardware.) Encypting in hardware gets interesting again when you want to try to protect against physical attacks to the system. (assuming very good case intrusion detection)> > If not, then it controls at least some hardware that can do DMA > > and can this way access all the memory. > You are correct. I will have to figure out a way in future to protect > against such type of DMA attacks.Well, solutions exist most likely in the form of IOMMUs. Christian _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
Assuming the following, 1) security of the Xen kernel is not brocken (through TPMs) 2) I need to protect against physical attacks to the system (because we have a very good intrusion detection system in place). So I''m going with Verilog in FPGA. 3) IOMMUs protecting against DMA attacks. Where in the xen source should I modify code to allocate guest memory from memory behind the FPGA and not "general" mem pool? Christian, I appreciate your participation and valuable suggestions (They will definitely find a place in my report). regards, Dinesh C> Encypting in hardware gets interesting again when you want to try to protect > against physical attacks to the system. (assuming very good case intrusion > detection)> Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2009 09:47:05 +0100 > From: christian@leber.de > To: dinesh_chan8@hotmail.com > Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Academic Project > CC: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com > > On Wed, Mar 04, 2009 at 10:11:41PM +0530, dinesh chandrasekaran wrote: > > Hi dinesh > > > Xen talks to the protection hardware behind which all the guest memory > > exists. > > The memory is mapped. > > And i was wrong, the dom0 can''t just access all memory in the system. > > > This is more secure because, > > now if do the following you cannot extract any useful information > > 1) xm save Guest guest.dump (assuming a guest named "Guest" is already > > running) > > this would dump the guest memory into a file in the dom0 disk. > > 2) Strings on guest.dump > > So encrypt it in the Xen kernel. > > > Since this guest.dump is encrypted by the protection hardware, and Xen > > just informed that "dom0 is running", > > That assumes that the dom0 always has to run alone on the machine, in 2009 the > minimum server has 8 cores (next year 12) and often more. > > > the encypted memory will only be released to dom0. This will be dumped > > into s file in dom0 disk. > > Ok, so by taking a step back and looking at the problem again, i think > you are basically facing two possibilities: > > 1.) The security of the Xen kernel is brocken > -> You are lost, your hardware can''t protect anything. > > 2.) The security of the Xen kernel is not brocke > -> Why on earth hardware? What you can do in Verilog on an FPGA, can > be done much more conveniently in C in the Xen kernel. > (Don''t get me wrong, I''m all pro building hardware.) > > Encypting in hardware gets interesting again when you want to try to protect > against physical attacks to the system. (assuming very good case intrusion > detection) > > > > If not, then it controls at least some hardware that can do DMA > > > and can this way access all the memory. > > You are correct. I will have to figure out a way in future to protect > > against such type of DMA attacks. > > Well, solutions exist most likely in the form of IOMMUs. > > > Christian > > _______________________________________________ > Xen-devel mailing list > Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com > http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel_________________________________________________________________ Windows Live Messenger. Multitasking at its finest. http://www.microsoft.com/india/windows/windowslive/messenger.aspx _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
Assuming the following, 1) security of the Xen kernel is not brocken (through TPMs) 2) I need to protect against physical attacks to the system (because we have a very good intrusion detection system in place). So I''m going with Verilog in FPGA. 3) IOMMUs protecting against DMA attacks. Where in the xen source should I modify code to allocate guest memory from memory behind the FPGA and not "general" mem pool? Christian, I appreciate your participation and valuable suggestions (They will definitely find a place in my report). regards, Dinesh C> Encypting in hardware gets interesting again when you want to try to protect > against physical attacks to the system. (assuming very good case intrusion > detection)> Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2009 09:47:05 +0100 > From: christian@leber.de > To: dinesh_chan8@hotmail.com > Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Academic Project > CC: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com > > On Wed, Mar 04, 2009 at 10:11:41PM +0530, dinesh chandrasekaran wrote: > > Hi dinesh > > > Xen talks to the protection hardware behind which all the guest memory > > exists. > > The memory is mapped. > > And i was wrong, the dom0 can''t just access all memory in the system. > > > This is more secure because, > > now if do the following you cannot extract any useful information > > 1) xm save Guest guest.dump (assuming a guest named "Guest" is already > > running) > > this would dump the guest memory into a file in the dom0 disk. > > 2) Strings on guest.dump > > So encrypt it in the Xen kernel. > > > Since this guest.dump is encrypted by the protection hardware, and Xen > > just informed that "dom0 is running", > > That assumes that the dom0 always has to run alone on the machine, in 2009 the > minimum server has 8 cores (next year 12) and often more. > > > the encypted memory will only be released to dom0. This will be dumped > > into s file in dom0 disk. > > Ok, so by taking a step back and looking at the problem again, i think > you are basically facing two possibilities: > > 1.) The security of the Xen kernel is brocken > -> You are lost, your hardware can''t protect anything. > > 2.) The security of the Xen kernel is not brocke > -> Why on earth hardware? What you can do in Verilog on an FPGA, can > be done much more conveniently in C in the Xen kernel. > (Don''t get me wrong, I''m all pro building hardware.) > > Encypting in hardware gets interesting again when you want to try to protect > against physical attacks to the system. (assuming very good case intrusion > detection) > > > > If not, then it controls at least some hardware that can do DMA > > > and can this way access all the memory. > > You are correct. I will have to figure out a way in future to protect > > against such type of DMA attacks. > > Well, solutions exist most likely in the form of IOMMUs. > > > Christian > > _______________________________________________ > Xen-devel mailing list > Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com > http://lists.xensource.com/xen-develWindows Live Messenger. Multitasking at its finest. _________________________________________________________________ Windows Live Messenger. Multitasking at its finest. http://www.microsoft.com/india/windows/windowslive/messenger.aspx _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel