Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Fri, 6 Nov 2020 21:13:11 +0000
From:   Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
To:     "Dr. Greg" <greg@enjellic.com>
Cc:     Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>, x86@kernel.org,
        linux-sgx@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>,
        linux-mm@kvack.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Jethro Beekman <jethro@fortanix.com>,
        Darren Kenny <darren.kenny@oracle.com>,
        andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com, asapek@google.com, bp@alien8.de,
        cedric.xing@intel.com, chenalexchen@google.com,
        conradparker@google.com, cyhanish@google.com,
        dave.hansen@intel.com, haitao.huang@intel.com, kai.huang@intel.com,
        kai.svahn@intel.com, kmoy@google.com, ludloff@google.com,
        luto@kernel.org, nhorman@redhat.com, npmccallum@redhat.com,
        puiterwijk@redhat.com, rientjes@google.com, tglx@linutronix.de,
        yaozhangx@google.com, mikko.ylinen@intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v40 10/24] mm: Add 'mprotect' hook to struct
 vm_operations_struct
Message-ID: <20201106211311.GT17076@casper.infradead.org>
References: <20201104145430.300542-1-jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
 <20201104145430.300542-11-jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>
 <20201106174359.GA24109@wind.enjellic.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20201106174359.GA24109@wind.enjellic.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Nov 06, 2020 at 11:43:59AM -0600, Dr. Greg wrote:
> The 900 pound primate in the room, that no one is acknowledging, is
> that this technology was designed to not allow the operating system to
> have any control over what it is doing.  In the mindset of kernel
> developers, the operating system is the absolute authority on
> security, so we find ourselves in a situation where the kernel needs
> to try and work around this fact so any solutions will be imperfect at
> best.
> 
> As I've noted before, this is actually a primary objective of enclave
> authors, since one of the desires for 'Confidential Computing' is to
> hide things like proprietary algorithms from the platform owners.  I
> think the driver needs to acknowledge this fact and equip platform
> owners with the simplest and most effective security solutions that
> are available.

Or we need to not merge "technology" that subverts the owner of
the hardware.  Remember: root kit authors are inventive buggers.