Received-SPF: softfail (google.com: domain of transitioning linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org does not designate 23.128.96.19 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.19;
Date:   Wed, 16 Mar 2022 18:05:29 +0000
From:   Eric Biggers <ebiggers@kernel.org>
To:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Cc:     axboe@kernel.dk, jaegeuk@kernel.org, chao@kernel.org,
        ulf.hansson@linaro.org, Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>,
        Daeho Jeong <daehojeong@google.com>,
        linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: security issue: data exposure when using block layer secure erase
Message-ID: <YjIm6f6pSX1CKeqb@gmail.com>
References: <20220316093740.GA7714@lst.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20220316093740.GA7714@lst.de>
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Mar 16, 2022 at 10:37:40AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> while staring at the block layer code I found what I think is a major
> security issue with the use of REQ_OP_SECURE_ERASE.
> 
> The issue is not about the actual protocol implementation, which only
> exists for eMMC [1], but about we handle issuing the operation in the
> block layer.  That is done through __blkdev_issue_discard, which
> takes various parameters into account to align the issue discard
> request to what the hardware prefers.  Which is perfectly fine for
> discard as an advisory operation, but deadly for an operation that
> wants to make data inaccessible.  The problem has existed ever since
> secure erase support was added to the kernel with commit
> 8d57a98ccd0b ("block: add secure discard"), which added secure erase
> support as a REQ_SECURE flag to the discard operation.

__blkdev_issue_discard() can break up the region into multiple bios, but I don't
see where it actually skips parts of the region.  Can you explain more
specifically where the problem is?

- Eric