Securing RDMA for High-Performance Datacenter Storage Systems

Securing RDMA for High-Performance Datacenter Storage Systems

Securing RDMA for High-Performance Datacenter Storage Systems Anna Kornfeld Simpson, Adriana Szekeres (Paul G. Allen School of Computer Science & Engineering, University of Washington), Jacob Nelson, Irene Zhang (Microsoft Research) 1 Remote Direct Memory Access (RDMA) does CPU-bypass over the datacenter network with only a few microseconds of latency RDMA over Converged Ethernet (RoCEv2) packet. Source: RoCEv2 spec, Infiniband Trade Association, 2014 Ethernet Head. IP Head. UDP Head. RDMA Head. & Data Queue Pair Info. Remote Memory Addr. and r_key Payload Abstracted RDMA portion of RoCEv2 packet. 2 Example RDMA System: Pilaf (2013): Put (SEND) Clients Server CPU Memory 3 2 1 4 NIC 5 3 Pilaf (2013): Unlike Put, Get is CPU-bypassing 4 RDMA not designed for datacenter security needs Security weaknesses discovered over past 2 decades (see Section 2 of paper for citations): • Confidentiality: packet in plaintext • Integrity: no packet integrity check or authentication • Availability: denial of service • Side channels: non-random r_keys and more 5 We analyzed recent distributed storage systems built on RDMA and discovered additional systems design challenges even after security fundamentals are fixed. • Can RDMA-based storage systems provide security at least as good as pre-RDMA datacenter security best practices? • We analyzed: Pilaf, FaRM, HERD, DrTM, FaSST, Octopus, Hyperloop, DrTM+H 6 Threat Model = Compromised Storage Client Clients Server CPU Memory Bad() NIC VLANs/virtualization does not help! Compromised client only needs to see its own network traffic to spoof RDMA. 7 Challenge 1: no auditability/logging on reads Clients Server CPU Memory 2 What data was exfiltrated? 1 NIC 3 Adversary does CPU-bypassing READ 8 Challenge 2: Design Implications of Storage Logic Location: RPC and Concurrency 5 4 6 DrTM (2016) Put 9 Challenge 3: Separating different users’ data • Single big remote memory registration -> attacker access to all user data • Vendor suggested solution (protection domains) a poor performance fit for storage systems with multiple storage clients who all want to access same data 10 Ingredients for more secure CPU-bypass systems Security Fundamentals System Design Challenges • High throughput AEAD • Logging strategy that does not cryptography for rely on client datapath (e.g. DTLS) • Alternatives to unreliable RPC • Centralized key • Finer-grained permissions on management remote data access Source: Zookeeper Project 11 Lots of big open questions for future research! • Wishlist for features to help support application security when building systems that use CPU-bypassing RDMA? • Wishlist for securing non-user-facing datacenter tasks? • How do we get these better features baked in? Changing the RDMA standard? Thank you for watching! Questions? Email Anna: [email protected] 12.

View Full Text

Details

  • File Type
    pdf
  • Upload Time
    -
  • Content Languages
    English
  • Upload User
    Anonymous/Not logged-in
  • File Pages
    12 Page
  • File Size
    -

Download

Channel Download Status
Express Download Enable

Copyright

We respect the copyrights and intellectual property rights of all users. All uploaded documents are either original works of the uploader or authorized works of the rightful owners.

  • Not to be reproduced or distributed without explicit permission.
  • Not used for commercial purposes outside of approved use cases.
  • Not used to infringe on the rights of the original creators.
  • If you believe any content infringes your copyright, please contact us immediately.

Support

For help with questions, suggestions, or problems, please contact us