On Fri, 13 Oct 2017 10:44:00 +0100 "Daniel P. Berrange" <berra...@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 11:37:08AM +0200, Cornelia Huck wrote: > > On Fri, 13 Oct 2017 11:10:05 +0200 > > Stefan Weil <s...@weilnetz.de> wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > the German Bundesamt für Sicherheit in der Informationstechnik > > > (Federal Office for Information Security) published a study on > > > the security of KVM and QEMU: > > > > > > https://www.bsi.bund.de/DE/Publikationen/Studien/Sicherheitsanalyse_KVM/sicherheitsanalyse_kvm.html > > > > > > (article only available in German) > > > > Thanks for posting this! > > > > I only looked at the conclusion for now. Some interesting points: > > > > - They state that QEMU's source code is well structured, readable and > > maintainable. I wonder what kind of source code they usually deal > > with ;) > > Most closed source apps are worse than even badly structured open > source code IME ;-) Ha, that's true from my experience as well ;) > > > - Most problems noted seemed to be related to signed<->unsigned > > conversions, but none were found to be exploitable. > > - They liked hardening via stack protection, NX, and ASLR, as well as > > the mechanisms used by libvirt. > > - They generally seemed to be happy with QEMU being deployed via > > libvirt. > > - Restrictions imposed via KVM (guest access to some CPU registers) > > scored positive points. They did not like that Hyper-V and PMU were > > not deconfigurable. > > - Lack of support for encryption/signing of network-based images was > > criticized. They ended up using Ceph and GlusterFS, which they were > > reasonably happy with. > > Hopefully the 'luks' driver (which can be layered over any block backend > including network ones), and the TLS support for NBD would be considered > to address this last point to some degree. At least from the encryption > side. > > Signing of disk images is impractical as it would imply having to download > the entire image contents to validate signature, rather defeating the point > of having a network based image. But perhaps this is lost in translation > and they mean something else by "signing of images" ? Could be my bad translation (they talk about "Verschlüsselung und Signierung"), but I haven't looked what they actually tried to accomplish.
