cachepc-qemu

Fork of AMDESE/qemu with changes for cachepc side-channel attack
git clone https://git.sinitax.com/sinitax/cachepc-qemu
Log | Files | Refs | Submodules | LICENSE | sfeed.txt

security.rst (7924B)


      1Security
      2========
      3
      4Overview
      5--------
      6
      7This chapter explains the security requirements that QEMU is designed to meet
      8and principles for securely deploying QEMU.
      9
     10Security Requirements
     11---------------------
     12
     13QEMU supports many different use cases, some of which have stricter security
     14requirements than others.  The community has agreed on the overall security
     15requirements that users may depend on.  These requirements define what is
     16considered supported from a security perspective.
     17
     18Virtualization Use Case
     19'''''''''''''''''''''''
     20
     21The virtualization use case covers cloud and virtual private server (VPS)
     22hosting, as well as traditional data center and desktop virtualization.  These
     23use cases rely on hardware virtualization extensions to execute guest code
     24safely on the physical CPU at close-to-native speed.
     25
     26The following entities are untrusted, meaning that they may be buggy or
     27malicious:
     28
     29- Guest
     30- User-facing interfaces (e.g. VNC, SPICE, WebSocket)
     31- Network protocols (e.g. NBD, live migration)
     32- User-supplied files (e.g. disk images, kernels, device trees)
     33- Passthrough devices (e.g. PCI, USB)
     34
     35Bugs affecting these entities are evaluated on whether they can cause damage in
     36real-world use cases and treated as security bugs if this is the case.
     37
     38Non-virtualization Use Case
     39'''''''''''''''''''''''''''
     40
     41The non-virtualization use case covers emulation using the Tiny Code Generator
     42(TCG).  In principle the TCG and device emulation code used in conjunction with
     43the non-virtualization use case should meet the same security requirements as
     44the virtualization use case.  However, for historical reasons much of the
     45non-virtualization use case code was not written with these security
     46requirements in mind.
     47
     48Bugs affecting the non-virtualization use case are not considered security
     49bugs at this time.  Users with non-virtualization use cases must not rely on
     50QEMU to provide guest isolation or any security guarantees.
     51
     52Architecture
     53------------
     54
     55This section describes the design principles that ensure the security
     56requirements are met.
     57
     58Guest Isolation
     59'''''''''''''''
     60
     61Guest isolation is the confinement of guest code to the virtual machine.  When
     62guest code gains control of execution on the host this is called escaping the
     63virtual machine.  Isolation also includes resource limits such as throttling of
     64CPU, memory, disk, or network.  Guests must be unable to exceed their resource
     65limits.
     66
     67QEMU presents an attack surface to the guest in the form of emulated devices.
     68The guest must not be able to gain control of QEMU.  Bugs in emulated devices
     69could allow malicious guests to gain code execution in QEMU.  At this point the
     70guest has escaped the virtual machine and is able to act in the context of the
     71QEMU process on the host.
     72
     73Guests often interact with other guests and share resources with them.  A
     74malicious guest must not gain control of other guests or access their data.
     75Disk image files and network traffic must be protected from other guests unless
     76explicitly shared between them by the user.
     77
     78Principle of Least Privilege
     79''''''''''''''''''''''''''''
     80
     81The principle of least privilege states that each component only has access to
     82the privileges necessary for its function.  In the case of QEMU this means that
     83each process only has access to resources belonging to the guest.
     84
     85The QEMU process should not have access to any resources that are inaccessible
     86to the guest.  This way the guest does not gain anything by escaping into the
     87QEMU process since it already has access to those same resources from within
     88the guest.
     89
     90Following the principle of least privilege immediately fulfills guest isolation
     91requirements.  For example, guest A only has access to its own disk image file
     92``a.img`` and not guest B's disk image file ``b.img``.
     93
     94In reality certain resources are inaccessible to the guest but must be
     95available to QEMU to perform its function.  For example, host system calls are
     96necessary for QEMU but are not exposed to guests.  A guest that escapes into
     97the QEMU process can then begin invoking host system calls.
     98
     99New features must be designed to follow the principle of least privilege.
    100Should this not be possible for technical reasons, the security risk must be
    101clearly documented so users are aware of the trade-off of enabling the feature.
    102
    103Isolation mechanisms
    104''''''''''''''''''''
    105
    106Several isolation mechanisms are available to realize this architecture of
    107guest isolation and the principle of least privilege.  With the exception of
    108Linux seccomp, these mechanisms are all deployed by management tools that
    109launch QEMU, such as libvirt.  They are also platform-specific so they are only
    110described briefly for Linux here.
    111
    112The fundamental isolation mechanism is that QEMU processes must run as
    113unprivileged users.  Sometimes it seems more convenient to launch QEMU as
    114root to give it access to host devices (e.g. ``/dev/net/tun``) but this poses a
    115huge security risk.  File descriptor passing can be used to give an otherwise
    116unprivileged QEMU process access to host devices without running QEMU as root.
    117It is also possible to launch QEMU as a non-root user and configure UNIX groups
    118for access to ``/dev/kvm``, ``/dev/net/tun``, and other device nodes.
    119Some Linux distros already ship with UNIX groups for these devices by default.
    120
    121- SELinux and AppArmor make it possible to confine processes beyond the
    122  traditional UNIX process and file permissions model.  They restrict the QEMU
    123  process from accessing processes and files on the host system that are not
    124  needed by QEMU.
    125
    126- Resource limits and cgroup controllers provide throughput and utilization
    127  limits on key resources such as CPU time, memory, and I/O bandwidth.
    128
    129- Linux namespaces can be used to make process, file system, and other system
    130  resources unavailable to QEMU.  A namespaced QEMU process is restricted to only
    131  those resources that were granted to it.
    132
    133- Linux seccomp is available via the QEMU ``--sandbox`` option.  It disables
    134  system calls that are not needed by QEMU, thereby reducing the host kernel
    135  attack surface.
    136
    137Sensitive configurations
    138------------------------
    139
    140There are aspects of QEMU that can have security implications which users &
    141management applications must be aware of.
    142
    143Monitor console (QMP and HMP)
    144'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''
    145
    146The monitor console (whether used with QMP or HMP) provides an interface
    147to dynamically control many aspects of QEMU's runtime operation. Many of the
    148commands exposed will instruct QEMU to access content on the host file system
    149and/or trigger spawning of external processes.
    150
    151For example, the ``migrate`` command allows for the spawning of arbitrary
    152processes for the purpose of tunnelling the migration data stream. The
    153``blockdev-add`` command instructs QEMU to open arbitrary files, exposing
    154their content to the guest as a virtual disk.
    155
    156Unless QEMU is otherwise confined using technologies such as SELinux, AppArmor,
    157or Linux namespaces, the monitor console should be considered to have privileges
    158equivalent to those of the user account QEMU is running under.
    159
    160It is further important to consider the security of the character device backend
    161over which the monitor console is exposed. It needs to have protection against
    162malicious third parties which might try to make unauthorized connections, or
    163perform man-in-the-middle attacks. Many of the character device backends do not
    164satisfy this requirement and so must not be used for the monitor console.
    165
    166The general recommendation is that the monitor console should be exposed over
    167a UNIX domain socket backend to the local host only. Use of the TCP based
    168character device backend is inappropriate unless configured to use both TLS
    169encryption and authorization control policy on client connections.
    170
    171In summary, the monitor console is considered a privileged control interface to
    172QEMU and as such should only be made accessible to a trusted management
    173application or user.