Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Fri, 20 Jul 2018 15:23:15 +0300
From:   "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name>
To:     Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>
Cc:     "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, x86@kernel.org,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
        Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com>,
        Kai Huang <kai.huang@linux.intel.com>,
        Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv5 03/19] mm/ksm: Do not merge pages with different KeyIDs
Message-ID: <20180720122315.5lue3trrmvewvxg2@kshutemo-mobl1>
References: <20180717112029.42378-1-kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>
 <20180717112029.42378-4-kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>
 <a6fc50f2-b0c2-32db-cbef-3de57d5e6b16@intel.com>
 <20180719073240.autom4g4cdm3jgd6@kshutemo-mobl1>
 <3045c925-f5a8-ae68-8f77-4cddaf040f9f@intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <3045c925-f5a8-ae68-8f77-4cddaf040f9f@intel.com>
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20180622
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 07:02:34AM -0700, Dave Hansen wrote:
> On 07/19/2018 12:32 AM, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 10:38:27AM -0700, Dave Hansen wrote:
> >> On 07/17/2018 04:20 AM, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> >>> Pages encrypted with different encryption keys are not allowed to be
> >>> merged by KSM. Otherwise it would cross security boundary.
> >> Let's say I'm using plain AES (not AES-XTS).  I use the same key in two
> >> keyid slots.  I map a page with the first keyid and another with the
> >> other keyid.
> >>
> >> Won't they have the same cipertext?  Why shouldn't we KSM them?
> > We compare plain text, not ciphertext. And for good reason.
> 
> What's the reason?  Probably good to talk about it for those playing
> along at home.

I'll update commit message.

> > Comparing ciphertext would only make KSM successful for AES-ECB that
> > doesn't dependent on physical address of the page.
> > 
> > MKTME only supports AES-XTS (no plans to support AES-ECB). It effectively
> > disables KSM if we go with comparing ciphertext.
> 
> But what's the security boundary that is violated?  You are talking
> about some practical concerns (KSM scanning inefficiency) which is a far
> cry from being any kind of security issue.

As with zero page, my initial reasoning was that mixing pages from
different secrutiy domains is bad idea.

-- 
 Kirill A. Shutemov