Olivier Deprez | 86d1ffd | 2021-06-01 15:37:16 +0200 | [diff] [blame] | 1 | SPMC threat model |
| 2 | ***************** |
| 3 | |
| 4 | ************************ |
| 5 | Introduction |
| 6 | ************************ |
| 7 | This document provides a threat model for the TF-A `Secure Partition Manager`_ |
| 8 | (SPM) implementation or more generally the S-EL2 reference firmware running on |
| 9 | systems implementing the FEAT_SEL2 (formerly Armv8.4 Secure EL2) architecture |
| 10 | extension. The SPM implementation is based on the `Arm Firmware Framework for |
| 11 | Armv8-A`_ specification. |
| 12 | |
| 13 | In brief, the broad FF-A specification and S-EL2 firmware implementation |
| 14 | provide: |
| 15 | |
| 16 | - Isolation of mutually mistrusting SW components, or endpoints in the FF-A |
| 17 | terminology. |
| 18 | - Distinct sandboxes in the secure world called secure partitions. This permits |
| 19 | isolation of services from multiple vendors. |
| 20 | - A standard protocol for communication and memory sharing between FF-A |
| 21 | endpoints. |
| 22 | - Mutual isolation of the normal world and the secure world (e.g. a Trusted OS |
| 23 | is prevented to map an arbitrary NS physical memory region such as the kernel |
| 24 | or the Hypervisor). |
| 25 | |
| 26 | ************************ |
| 27 | Target of Evaluation |
| 28 | ************************ |
| 29 | In this threat model, the target of evaluation is the S-EL2 firmware or the |
| 30 | ``Secure Partition Manager Core`` component (SPMC). |
| 31 | The monitor and SPMD at EL3 are covered by the `Generic TF-A threat model`_. |
| 32 | |
| 33 | The scope for this threat model is: |
| 34 | |
| 35 | - The TF-A implementation for the S-EL2 SPMC based on the Hafnium hypervisor |
| 36 | running in the secure world of TrustZone (at S-EL2 exception level). |
| 37 | The threat model is not related to the normal world Hypervisor or VMs. |
| 38 | The S-EL1 SPMC solution is not covered. |
| 39 | - The implementation complies with the FF-A v1.0 specification. |
| 40 | - Secure partitions are statically provisioned at boot time. |
| 41 | - Focus on the run-time part of the life-cycle (no specific emphasis on boot |
| 42 | time, factory firmware provisioning, firmware udpate etc.) |
| 43 | - Not covering advanced or invasive physical attacks such as decapsulation, |
| 44 | FIB etc. |
| 45 | - Assumes secure boot or in particular TF-A trusted boot (TBBR or dual CoT) is |
| 46 | enabled. An attacker cannot boot arbitrary images that are not approved by the |
| 47 | SiP or platform providers. |
| 48 | |
| 49 | Data Flow Diagram |
| 50 | ====================== |
| 51 | Figure 1 shows a high-level data flow diagram for the SPM split into an SPMD |
| 52 | component at EL3 and an SPMC component at S-EL2. The SPMD mostly acts as a |
| 53 | relayer/pass-through between the normal world and the secure world. It is |
| 54 | assumed to expose small attack surface. |
| 55 | |
| 56 | A description of each diagram element is given in Table 1. In the diagram, the |
| 57 | red broken lines indicate trust boundaries. |
| 58 | |
| 59 | Components outside of the broken lines are considered untrusted. |
| 60 | |
| 61 | .. uml:: ../resources/diagrams/plantuml/spm_dfd.puml |
| 62 | :caption: Figure 1: SPMC Data Flow Diagram |
| 63 | |
| 64 | .. table:: Table 1: SPMC Data Flow Diagram Description |
| 65 | |
| 66 | +---------------------+--------------------------------------------------------+ |
| 67 | | Diagram Element | Description | |
| 68 | +=====================+========================================================+ |
| 69 | | ``DF1`` | SP to SPMC communication. FF-A function invocation or | |
| 70 | | | implementation-defined Hypervisor call. | |
| 71 | +---------------------+--------------------------------------------------------+ |
| 72 | | ``DF2`` | SPMC to SPMD FF-A call. | |
| 73 | +---------------------+--------------------------------------------------------+ |
| 74 | | ``DF3`` | SPMD to NS forwarding. | |
| 75 | +---------------------+--------------------------------------------------------+ |
| 76 | | ``DF4`` | SP to SP FF-A direct message request/response. | |
| 77 | | | Note as a matter of simplifying the diagram | |
| 78 | | | the SP to SP communication happens through the SPMC | |
| 79 | | | (SP1 performs a direct message request to the | |
| 80 | | | SPMC targeting SP2 as destination. And similarly for | |
| 81 | | | the direct message response from SP2 to SP1). | |
| 82 | +---------------------+--------------------------------------------------------+ |
| 83 | | ``DF5`` | HW control. | |
| 84 | +---------------------+--------------------------------------------------------+ |
| 85 | | ``DF6`` | Bootloader image loading. | |
| 86 | +---------------------+--------------------------------------------------------+ |
| 87 | | ``DF7`` | External memory access. | |
| 88 | +---------------------+--------------------------------------------------------+ |
| 89 | |
| 90 | ********************* |
| 91 | Threat Analysis |
| 92 | ********************* |
| 93 | |
| 94 | This threat model follows a similar methodology to the `Generic TF-A threat model`_. |
| 95 | The following sections define: |
| 96 | |
| 97 | - Trust boundaries |
| 98 | - Assets |
| 99 | - Theat agents |
| 100 | - Threat types |
| 101 | |
| 102 | Trust boundaries |
| 103 | ============================ |
| 104 | |
| 105 | - Normal world is untrusted. |
| 106 | - Secure world and normal world are separate trust boundaries. |
| 107 | - EL3 monitor, SPMD and SPMC are trusted. |
| 108 | - Bootloaders (in particular BL1/BL2 if using TF-A) and run-time BL31 are |
| 109 | implicitely trusted by the usage of secure boot. |
| 110 | - EL3 monitor, SPMD, SPMC do not trust SPs. |
| 111 | |
| 112 | .. figure:: ../resources/diagrams/spm-threat-model-trust-boundaries.png |
| 113 | |
| 114 | Figure 2: Trust boundaries |
| 115 | |
| 116 | Assets |
| 117 | ============================ |
| 118 | |
| 119 | The following assets are identified: |
| 120 | |
| 121 | - SPMC state. |
| 122 | - SP state. |
| 123 | - Information exchange between endpoints (partition messages). |
| 124 | - SPMC secrets (e.g. pointer authentication key when enabled) |
| 125 | - SP secrets (e.g. application keys). |
| 126 | - Scheduling cycles. |
| 127 | - Shared memory. |
| 128 | |
| 129 | Threat Agents |
| 130 | ============================ |
| 131 | |
| 132 | The following threat agents are identified: |
| 133 | |
| 134 | - NS-Endpoint identifies a non-secure endpoint: normal world client at NS-EL2 |
| 135 | (Hypervisor) or NS-EL1 (VM or OS kernel). |
| 136 | - S-Endpoint identifies a secure endpoint typically a secure partition. |
| 137 | - Hardware attacks (non-invasive) requiring a physical access to the device, |
| 138 | such as bus probing or DRAM stress. |
| 139 | |
| 140 | Threat types |
| 141 | ============================ |
| 142 | |
| 143 | The following threat categories as exposed in the `Generic TF-A threat model`_ |
| 144 | are re-used: |
| 145 | |
| 146 | - Spoofing |
| 147 | - Tampering |
| 148 | - Repudiation |
| 149 | - Information disclosure |
| 150 | - Denial of service |
| 151 | - Elevation of privileges |
| 152 | |
| 153 | Similarly this threat model re-uses the same threat risk ratings. The risk |
| 154 | analysis is evaluated based on the environment being ``Server`` or ``Mobile``. |
| 155 | |
| 156 | Threat Assessment |
| 157 | ============================ |
| 158 | |
| 159 | The following threats are identified by applying STRIDE analysis on each diagram |
| 160 | element of the data flow diagram. |
| 161 | |
| 162 | +------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+ |
| 163 | | ID | 01 | |
| 164 | +========================+====================================================+ |
| 165 | | ``Threat`` | **An endpoint impersonates the sender or receiver | |
| 166 | | | FF-A ID in a direct request/response invocation.** | |
| 167 | +------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+ |
| 168 | | ``Diagram Elements`` | DF1, DF2, DF3, DF4 | |
| 169 | +------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+ |
| 170 | | ``Affected TF-A | SPMD, SPMC | |
| 171 | | Components`` | | |
| 172 | +------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+ |
| 173 | | ``Assets`` | SP state | |
| 174 | +------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+ |
| 175 | | ``Threat Agent`` | NS-Endpoint, S-Endpoint | |
| 176 | +------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+ |
| 177 | | ``Threat Type`` | Spoofing | |
| 178 | +------------------------+------------------+-----------------+---------------+ |
| 179 | | ``Application`` | ``Server`` | ``Mobile`` | | |
| 180 | +------------------------+------------------++----------------+---------------+ |
| 181 | | ``Impact`` | Critical(5) | Critical(5) | | |
| 182 | +------------------------+------------------++----------------+---------------+ |
| 183 | | ``Likelihood`` | Critical(5) | Critical(5) | | |
| 184 | +------------------------+------------------++----------------+---------------+ |
| 185 | | ``Total Risk Rating`` | Critical(25) | Critical(25) | | |
| 186 | +------------------------+------------------+-----------------+---------------+ |
| 187 | | ``Mitigations`` | The TF-A SPMC does not mitigate this threat. | |
| 188 | | | The guidance below is left for a system integrator | |
| 189 | | | to implemented as necessary. | |
| 190 | | | The SPMC must enforce checks in the direct message | |
| 191 | | | request/response interfaces such an endpoint cannot| |
| 192 | | | spoof the origin and destination worlds (e.g. a NWd| |
| 193 | | | originated message directed to the SWd cannot use a| |
| 194 | | | SWd ID as the sender ID). | |
| 195 | | | Additionally a software component residing in the | |
| 196 | | | SPMC can be added for the purpose of direct | |
| 197 | | | request/response filtering. | |
| 198 | | | It can be configured with the list of known IDs | |
| 199 | | | and about which interaction can occur between one | |
| 200 | | | and another endpoint (e.g. which NWd endpoint ID | |
| 201 | | | sends a direct request to which SWd endpoint ID). | |
| 202 | | | This component checks the sender/receiver fields | |
| 203 | | | for a legitimate communication between endpoints. | |
| 204 | | | A similar component can exist in the OS kernel | |
| 205 | | | driver, or Hypervisor although it remains untrusted| |
| 206 | | | by the SPMD/SPMC. | |
| 207 | +------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+ |
| 208 | |
| 209 | +------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+ |
| 210 | | ID | 02 | |
| 211 | +========================+====================================================+ |
| 212 | | ``Threat`` | **Tampering with memory shared between an endpoint | |
| 213 | | | and the SPMC.** | |
| 214 | | | A malicious endpoint may attempt tampering with its| |
| 215 | | | RX/TX buffer contents while the SPMC is processing | |
| 216 | | | it (TOCTOU). | |
| 217 | +------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+ |
| 218 | | ``Diagram Elements`` | DF1, DF3, DF4, DF7 | |
| 219 | +------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+ |
| 220 | | ``Affected TF-A | SPMC | |
| 221 | | Components`` | | |
| 222 | +------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+ |
| 223 | | ``Assets`` | Shared memory, Information exchange | |
| 224 | +------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+ |
| 225 | | ``Threat Agent`` | NS-Endpoint, S-Endpoint | |
| 226 | +------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+ |
| 227 | | ``Threat Type`` | Tampering | |
| 228 | +------------------------+------------------+-----------------+---------------+ |
| 229 | | ``Application`` | ``Server`` | ``Mobile`` | | |
| 230 | +------------------------+------------------+-----------------+---------------+ |
| 231 | | ``Impact`` | High (4) | High (4) | | |
| 232 | +------------------------+------------------+-----------------+---------------+ |
| 233 | | ``Likelihood`` | High (4) | High (4) | | |
| 234 | +------------------------+------------------+-----------------+---------------+ |
| 235 | | ``Total Risk Rating`` | High (16) | High (16) | | |
| 236 | +------------------------+------------------+-----------------+---------------+ |
| 237 | | ``Mitigations`` | In context of FF-A v1.0 this is the case of sharing| |
| 238 | | | the RX/TX buffer pair and usage in the | |
| 239 | | | PARTITION_INFO_GET or mem sharing primitives. | |
| 240 | | | The SPMC must copy the contents of the TX buffer | |
| 241 | | | to an internal temporary buffer before processing | |
| 242 | | | its contents. The SPMC must implement hardened | |
| 243 | | | input validation on data transmitted through the TX| |
| 244 | | | buffer by an untrusted endpoint. | |
| 245 | | | The TF-A SPMC mitigates this threat by enforcing | |
| 246 | | | checks on data transmitted through RX/TX buffers. | |
| 247 | +------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+ |
| 248 | |
| 249 | +------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+ |
| 250 | | ID | 03 | |
| 251 | +========================+====================================================+ |
| 252 | | ``Threat`` | **An endpoint may tamper with its own state or the | |
| 253 | | | state of another endpoint.** | |
| 254 | | | A malicious endpoint may attempt violating: | |
| 255 | | | - its own or another SP state by using an unusual | |
| 256 | | | combination (or out-of-order) FF-A function | |
| 257 | | | invocations. | |
| 258 | | | This can also be an endpoint emitting | |
| 259 | | | FF-A function invocations to another endpoint while| |
| 260 | | | the latter in not in a state to receive it (e.g. a | |
| 261 | | | SP sends a direct request to the normal world early| |
| 262 | | | while the normal world is not booted yet). | |
| 263 | | | - the SPMC state itself by employing unexpected | |
| 264 | | | transitions in FF-A memory sharing, direct requests| |
| 265 | | | and responses, or handling of interrupts. | |
| 266 | | | This can be led by random stimuli injection or | |
| 267 | | | fuzzing. | |
| 268 | +------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+ |
| 269 | | ``Diagram Elements`` | DF1, DF2, DF3, DF4 | |
| 270 | +------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+ |
| 271 | | ``Affected TF-A | SPMD, SPMC | |
| 272 | | Components`` | | |
| 273 | +------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+ |
| 274 | | ``Assets`` | SP state, SPMC state | |
| 275 | +------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+ |
| 276 | | ``Threat Agent`` | NS-Endpoint, S-Endpoint | |
| 277 | +------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+ |
| 278 | | ``Threat Type`` | Tampering | |
| 279 | +------------------------+------------------+-----------------+---------------+ |
| 280 | | ``Application`` | ``Server`` | ``Mobile`` | | |
| 281 | +------------------------+------------------+-----------------+---------------+ |
| 282 | | ``Impact`` | High (4) | High (4) | | |
| 283 | +------------------------+------------------+-----------------+---------------+ |
| 284 | | ``Likelihood`` | Medium (3) | Medium (3) | | |
| 285 | +------------------------+------------------+-----------------+---------------+ |
| 286 | | ``Total Risk Rating`` | High (12) | High (12) | | |
| 287 | +------------------------+------------------+-----------------+---------------+ |
| 288 | | ``Mitigations`` | The SPMC may be vulnerable to invalid state | |
| 289 | | | transitions for itself or while handling an SP | |
| 290 | | | state. The FF-A v1.1 specification provides a | |
| 291 | | | guidance on those state transitions (run-time | |
| 292 | | | model). The TF-A SPMC will be hardened in future | |
| 293 | | | releases to follow this guidance. | |
| 294 | | | Additionally The TF-A SPMC mitigates the threat by | |
| 295 | | | runs of the Arm `FF-A ACS`_ compliance test suite. | |
| 296 | +------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+ |
| 297 | |
| 298 | +------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+ |
| 299 | | ID | 04 | |
| 300 | +========================+====================================================+ |
| 301 | | ``Threat`` | *An attacker may attempt injecting errors by the | |
| 302 | | | use of external DRAM stress techniques.** | |
| 303 | | | A malicious agent may attempt toggling an SP | |
| 304 | | | Stage-2 MMU descriptor bit within the page tables | |
| 305 | | | that the SPMC manages. This can happen in Rowhammer| |
| 306 | | | types of attack. | |
| 307 | +------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+ |
| 308 | | ``Diagram Elements`` | DF7 | |
| 309 | +------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+ |
| 310 | | ``Affected TF-A | SPMC | |
| 311 | | Components`` | | |
| 312 | +------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+ |
| 313 | | ``Assets`` | SP or SPMC state | |
| 314 | +------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+ |
| 315 | | ``Threat Agent`` | Hardware attack | |
| 316 | +------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+ |
| 317 | | ``Threat Type`` | Tampering | |
| 318 | +------------------------+------------------+---------------+-----------------+ |
| 319 | | ``Application`` | ``Server`` | ``Mobile`` | | |
| 320 | +------------------------+------------------+---------------+-----------------+ |
| 321 | | ``Impact`` | High (4) | High (4) | | |
| 322 | +------------------------+------------------+---------------+-----------------+ |
| 323 | | ``Likelihood`` | Low (2) | Medium (3) | | |
| 324 | +------------------------+------------------+---------------+-----------------+ |
| 325 | | ``Total Risk Rating`` | Medium (8) | High (12) | | |
| 326 | +------------------------+------------------+---------------+-----------------+ |
| 327 | | ``Mitigations`` | The TF-A SPMC does not provide mitigations to this | |
| 328 | | | type of attack. It can be addressed by the use of | |
| 329 | | | dedicated HW circuity or hardening at the chipset | |
| 330 | | | or platform level left to the integrator. | |
| 331 | +------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+ |
| 332 | |
| 333 | +------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+ |
| 334 | | ID | 05 | |
| 335 | +========================+====================================================+ |
| 336 | | ``Threat`` | **Protection of the SPMC from a DMA capable device | |
| 337 | | | upstream to an SMMU.** | |
| 338 | | | A device may attempt to tamper with the internal | |
| 339 | | | SPMC code/data sections. | |
| 340 | +------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+ |
| 341 | | ``Diagram Elements`` | DF5 | |
| 342 | +------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+ |
| 343 | | ``Affected TF-A | SPMC | |
| 344 | | Components`` | | |
| 345 | +------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+ |
| 346 | | ``Assets`` | SPMC or SP state | |
| 347 | +------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+ |
| 348 | | ``Threat Agent`` | NS-Endpoint, S-Endpoint | |
| 349 | +------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+ |
| 350 | | ``Threat Type`` | Tampering, Elevation of privileges | |
| 351 | +------------------------+------------------+---------------+-----------------+ |
| 352 | | ``Application`` | ``Server`` | ``Mobile`` | | |
| 353 | +------------------------+------------------+---------------+-----------------+ |
| 354 | | ``Impact`` | High (4) | High (4) | | |
| 355 | +------------------------+------------------+---------------+-----------------+ |
| 356 | | ``Likelihood`` | Medium (3) | Medium (3) | | |
| 357 | +------------------------+------------------+---------------+-----------------+ |
| 358 | | ``Total Risk Rating`` | High (12) | High (12) | | |
| 359 | +------------------------+------------------+---------------+-----------------+ |
| 360 | | ``Mitigations`` | A platform may prefer assigning boot time, | |
| 361 | | | statically alocated memory regions through the SMMU| |
| 362 | | | configuration and page tables. The FF-A v1.1 | |
| 363 | | | specification provisions this capability through | |
| 364 | | | static DMA isolation. | |
| 365 | | | The TF-A SPMC does not mitigate this threat. | |
| 366 | | | It will adopt the static DMA isolation approach in | |
| 367 | | | a future release. | |
| 368 | +------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+ |
| 369 | |
| 370 | +------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+ |
| 371 | | ID | 06 | |
| 372 | +========================+====================================================+ |
| 373 | | ``Threat`` | **Replay fragments of past communication between | |
| 374 | | | endpoints.** | |
| 375 | | | A malicious endpoint may replay a message exchange | |
| 376 | | | that occured between two legitimate endpoint as | |
| 377 | | | a matter of triggering a malfunction or extracting | |
| 378 | | | secrets from the receiving endpoint. In particular | |
| 379 | | | the memory sharing operation with fragmented | |
| 380 | | | messages between an endpoint and the SPMC may be | |
| 381 | | | replayed by a malicious agent as a matter of | |
| 382 | | | getting access or gaining permissions to a memory | |
| 383 | | | region which does not belong to this agent. | |
| 384 | +------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+ |
| 385 | | ``Diagram Elements`` | DF2, DF3 | |
| 386 | +------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+ |
| 387 | | ``Affected TF-A | SPMC | |
| 388 | | Components`` | | |
| 389 | +------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+ |
| 390 | | ``Assets`` | Information exchange | |
| 391 | +------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+ |
| 392 | | ``Threat Agent`` | NS-Endpoint, S-Endpoint | |
| 393 | +------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+ |
| 394 | | ``Threat Type`` | Repdudiation | |
| 395 | +------------------------+------------------+---------------+-----------------+ |
| 396 | | ``Application`` | ``Server`` | ``Mobile`` | | |
| 397 | +------------------------+------------------+---------------+-----------------+ |
| 398 | | ``Impact`` | Medium (3) | Medium (3) | | |
| 399 | +------------------------+------------------+---------------+-----------------+ |
| 400 | | ``Likelihood`` | High (4) | High (4) | | |
| 401 | +------------------------+------------------+---------------+-----------------+ |
| 402 | | ``Total Risk Rating`` | High (12) | High (12) | | |
| 403 | +------------------------+------------------+---------------+-----------------+ |
| 404 | | ``Mitigations`` | The TF-A SPMC does not mitigate this threat. | |
| 405 | +------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+ |
| 406 | |
| 407 | +------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+ |
| 408 | | ID | 07 | |
| 409 | +========================+====================================================+ |
| 410 | | ``Threat`` | **A malicious endpoint may attempt to extract data | |
| 411 | | | or state information by the use of invalid or | |
| 412 | | | incorrect input arguments.** | |
| 413 | | | Lack of input parameter validation or side effects | |
| 414 | | | of maliciously forged input parameters might affect| |
| 415 | | | the SPMC. | |
| 416 | +------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+ |
| 417 | | ``Diagram Elements`` | DF1, DF2, DF3, DF4 | |
| 418 | +------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+ |
| 419 | | ``Affected TF-A | SPMD, SPMC | |
| 420 | | Components`` | | |
| 421 | +------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+ |
| 422 | | ``Assets`` | SP secrets, SPMC secrets, SP state, SPMC state | |
| 423 | +------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+ |
| 424 | | ``Threat Agent`` | NS-Endpoint, S-Endpoint | |
| 425 | +------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+ |
| 426 | | ``Threat Type`` | Information discolure | |
| 427 | +------------------------+------------------+---------------+-----------------+ |
| 428 | | ``Application`` | ``Server`` | ``Mobile`` | | |
| 429 | +------------------------+------------------+---------------+-----------------+ |
| 430 | | ``Impact`` | High (4) | High (4) | | |
| 431 | +------------------------+------------------+---------------+-----------------+ |
| 432 | | ``Likelihood`` | Medium (3) | Medium (3) | | |
| 433 | +------------------------+------------------+---------------+-----------------+ |
| 434 | | ``Total Risk Rating`` | High (12) | High (12) | | |
| 435 | +------------------------+------------------+---------------+-----------------+ |
| 436 | | ``Mitigations`` | Secure Partitions must follow security standards | |
| 437 | | | and best practises as a way to mitigate the risk | |
| 438 | | | of common vulnerabilities to be exploited. | |
| 439 | | | The use of software (canaries) or hardware | |
| 440 | | | hardening techniques (XN, WXN, BTI, pointer | |
| 441 | | | authentication, MTE) helps detecting and stopping | |
| 442 | | | an exploitation early. | |
| 443 | | | The TF-A SPMC mitigates this threat by implementing| |
| 444 | | | stack protector, pointer authentication, BTI, XN, | |
| 445 | | | WXN, security hardening techniques. | |
| 446 | +------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+ |
| 447 | |
| 448 | +------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+ |
| 449 | | ID | 08 | |
| 450 | +========================+====================================================+ |
| 451 | | ``Threat`` | **A malicious endpoint may forge a direct message | |
| 452 | | | request such that it reveals the internal state of | |
| 453 | | | another endpoint through the direct message | |
| 454 | | | response.** | |
| 455 | | | The secure partition or SPMC replies to a partition| |
| 456 | | | message by a direct message response with | |
| 457 | | | information which may reveal its internal state | |
| 458 | | | (.e.g. partition message response outside of | |
| 459 | | | allowed bounds). | |
| 460 | +------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+ |
| 461 | | ``Diagram Elements`` | DF1, DF2, DF3, DF4 | |
| 462 | +------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+ |
| 463 | | ``Affected TF-A | SPMC | |
| 464 | | Components`` | | |
| 465 | +------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+ |
| 466 | | ``Assets`` | SPMC or SP state | |
| 467 | +------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+ |
| 468 | | ``Threat Agent`` | NS-Endpoint, S-Endpoint | |
| 469 | +------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+ |
| 470 | | ``Threat Type`` | Information discolure | |
| 471 | +------------------------+------------------+---------------+-----------------+ |
| 472 | | ``Application`` | ``Server`` | ``Mobile`` | | |
| 473 | +------------------------+------------------+---------------+-----------------+ |
| 474 | | ``Impact`` | Medium (3) | Medium (3) | | |
| 475 | +------------------------+------------------+---------------+-----------------+ |
| 476 | | ``Likelihood`` | Low (2) | Low (2) | | |
| 477 | +------------------------+------------------+---------------+-----------------+ |
| 478 | | ``Total Risk Rating`` | Medium (6) | Medium (6) | | |
| 479 | +------------------------+------------------+---------------+-----------------+ |
| 480 | | ``Mitigations`` | For the specific case of direct requests targetting| |
| 481 | | | the SPMC, the latter is hardened to prevent | |
| 482 | | | its internal state or the state of an SP to be | |
| 483 | | | revealed through a direct message response. | |
| 484 | | | Further FF-A v1.1 guidance about run time models | |
| 485 | | | and partition states will be implemented in future | |
| 486 | | | TF-A SPMC releases. | |
| 487 | +------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+ |
| 488 | |
| 489 | +------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+ |
| 490 | | ID | 09 | |
| 491 | +========================+====================================================+ |
| 492 | | ``Threat`` | **Probing the FF-A communication between | |
| 493 | | | endpoints.** | |
| 494 | | | SPMC and SPs are typically loaded to external | |
| 495 | | | memory (protected by a TrustZone memory | |
| 496 | | | controller). A malicious agent may use non invasive| |
| 497 | | | methods to probe the external memory bus and | |
| 498 | | | extract the traffic between an SP and the SPMC or | |
| 499 | | | among SPs when shared buffers are held in external | |
| 500 | | | memory. | |
| 501 | +------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+ |
| 502 | | ``Diagram Elements`` | DF7 | |
| 503 | +------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+ |
| 504 | | ``Affected TF-A | SPMC | |
| 505 | | Components`` | | |
| 506 | +------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+ |
| 507 | | ``Assets`` | SP/SPMC state, SP/SPMC secrets | |
| 508 | +------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+ |
| 509 | | ``Threat Agent`` | Hardware attack | |
| 510 | +------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+ |
| 511 | | ``Threat Type`` | Information disclosure | |
| 512 | +------------------------+------------------+-----------------+---------------+ |
| 513 | | ``Application`` | ``Server`` | ``Mobile`` | | |
| 514 | +------------------------+------------------+-----------------+---------------+ |
| 515 | | ``Impact`` | Medium (3) | Medium (3) | | |
| 516 | +------------------------+------------------+-----------------+---------------+ |
| 517 | | ``Likelihood`` | Low (2) | Medium (3) | | |
| 518 | +------------------------+------------------+-----------------+---------------+ |
| 519 | | ``Total Risk Rating`` | Medium (6) | Medium (9) | | |
| 520 | +------------------------+------------------+-----------------+---------------+ |
| 521 | | ``Mitigations`` | It is expected the platform or chipset provides | |
| 522 | | | guarantees in protecting the DRAM contents. | |
| 523 | | | The TF-A SPMC does not mitigate this class of | |
| 524 | | | attack and this is left to the integrator. | |
| 525 | +------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+ |
| 526 | |
| 527 | +------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+ |
| 528 | | ID | 10 | |
| 529 | +========================+====================================================+ |
| 530 | | ``Threat`` | **A malicious agent may attempt revealing the SPMC | |
| 531 | | | state or secrets by the use of software-based cache| |
| 532 | | | side-channel attack techniques.** | |
| 533 | +------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+ |
| 534 | | ``Diagram Elements`` | DF7 | |
| 535 | +------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+ |
| 536 | | ``Affected TF-A | SPMC | |
| 537 | | Components`` | | |
| 538 | +------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+ |
| 539 | | ``Assets`` | SP or SPMC state | |
| 540 | +------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+ |
| 541 | | ``Threat Agent`` | NS-Endpoint, S-Endpoint | |
| 542 | +------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+ |
| 543 | | ``Threat Type`` | Information disclosure | |
| 544 | +------------------------+------------------+-----------------+---------------+ |
| 545 | | ``Application`` | ``Server`` | ``Mobile`` | | |
| 546 | +------------------------+------------------+-----------------+---------------+ |
| 547 | | ``Impact`` | Medium (3) | Medium (3) | | |
| 548 | +------------------------+------------------+-----------------+---------------+ |
| 549 | | ``Likelihood`` | Low (2) | Low (2) | | |
| 550 | +------------------------+------------------+-----------------+---------------+ |
| 551 | | ``Total Risk Rating`` | Medium (6) | Medium (6) | | |
| 552 | +------------------------+------------------+-----------------+---------------+ |
| 553 | | ``Mitigations`` | From an integration perspective it is assumed | |
| 554 | | | platforms consuming the SPMC component at S-EL2 | |
| 555 | | | (hence implementing the Armv8.4 FEAT_SEL2 | |
| 556 | | | architecture extension) implement mitigations to | |
| 557 | | | Spectre, Meltdown or other cache timing | |
| 558 | | | side-channel type of attacks. | |
| 559 | | | The TF-A SPMC implements one mitigation (barrier | |
| 560 | | | preventing speculation past exeception returns). | |
| 561 | | | The SPMC may be hardened further with SW | |
| 562 | | | mitigations (e.g. speculation barriers) for the | |
| 563 | | | cases not covered in HW. Usage of hardened | |
| 564 | | | compilers and appropriate options, code inspection | |
| 565 | | | are recommended ways to mitigate Spectre types of | |
| 566 | | | attacks. For non-hardened cores, the usage of | |
| 567 | | | techniques such a kernel page table isolation can | |
| 568 | | | help mitigating Meltdown type of attacks. | |
| 569 | +------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+ |
| 570 | |
| 571 | +------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+ |
| 572 | | ID | 11 | |
| 573 | +========================+====================================================+ |
| 574 | | ``Threat`` | **A malicious endpoint may attempt flooding the | |
| 575 | | | SPMC with requests targetting a service within an | |
| 576 | | | endpoint such that it denies another endpoint to | |
| 577 | | | access this service.** | |
| 578 | | | Similarly, the malicious endpoint may target a | |
| 579 | | | a service within an endpoint such that the latter | |
| 580 | | | is unable to request services from another | |
| 581 | | | endpoint. | |
| 582 | +------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+ |
| 583 | | ``Diagram Elements`` | DF1, DF2, DF3, DF4 | |
| 584 | +------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+ |
| 585 | | ``Affected TF-A | SPMC | |
| 586 | | Components`` | | |
| 587 | +------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+ |
| 588 | | ``Assets`` | SPMC state | |
| 589 | +------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+ |
| 590 | | ``Threat Agent`` | NS-Endpoint, S-Endpoint | |
| 591 | +------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+ |
| 592 | | ``Threat Type`` | Denial of service | |
| 593 | +------------------------+------------------+-----------------+---------------+ |
| 594 | | ``Application`` | ``Server`` | ``Mobile`` | | |
| 595 | +------------------------+------------------+-----------------+---------------+ |
| 596 | | ``Impact`` | Medium (3) | Medium (3) | | |
| 597 | +------------------------+------------------+-----------------+---------------+ |
| 598 | | ``Likelihood`` | Medium (3) | Medium (3) | | |
| 599 | +------------------------+------------------+-----------------+---------------+ |
| 600 | | ``Total Risk Rating`` | Medium (9) | Medium (9) | | |
| 601 | +------------------------+------------------+-----------------+---------------+ |
| 602 | | ``Mitigations`` | The TF-A SPMC does not mitigate this threat. | |
| 603 | | | Bounding the time for operations to complete can | |
| 604 | | | be achieved by the usage of a trusted watchdog. | |
| 605 | | | Other quality of service monitoring can be achieved| |
| 606 | | | in the SPMC such as counting a number of operations| |
| 607 | | | in a limited timeframe. | |
| 608 | +------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+ |
| 609 | |
| 610 | -------------- |
| 611 | |
| 612 | *Copyright (c) 2021, Arm Limited. All rights reserved.* |
| 613 | |
| 614 | .. _Arm Firmware Framework for Armv8-A: https://developer.arm.com/docs/den0077/latest |
| 615 | .. _Secure Partition Manager: ../components/secure-partition-manager.html |
| 616 | .. _Generic TF-A threat model: ./threat_model.html#threat-analysis |
| 617 | .. _FF-A ACS: https://github.com/ARM-software/ff-a-acs/releases |