Firecracker VM Escape: PwnEscape Part 2

(pwn.ai)

60 points | by SerCe 1 hour ago

7 comments

  • lrvick 44 minutes ago
    I am more convinced by the day that the Nova Microhypervisor approach is correct.

    Do virtualization with a tiny formally verified microkernel and have complex kernels like Linux run underneath instead of letting a huge, complex, and brittle linux kernel and vm ecosystem control the hypervisor layer.

    https://hypervisor.org/

    • eddythompson80 24 minutes ago
      How is this different from Xen? It's the same approach as Xen or Hyper-V where the hypervisor is its own component, then you boot into a virtualized Dom0 or Root Partition (in Xen and Hyper-V terminology respectively) that can manage the hypervisor underneath it.

      This is different from KVM where your hypervisor runs in your Dom0/Root Partition.

      • lrvick 20 minutes ago
        This is a much lighter weight (~100k) alternative to Xen focused on baremetal TPM anchored remote attestation, formal verification, and trusted computing applications.

        Anyone considering Xen should probably also consider Nova depending on requirements.

      • markasoftware 13 minutes ago
        Xen had a generic guest to host vulnerability disclosed in the last few days: https://codeant.ai/security-research/xenbleed-a-grant-copy-c...
    • tptacek 11 minutes ago
      I don't know much of anything about Nova but since the late 1990s this has also been the pitch for L4; there are several mature L4's.
      • lrvick 6 minutes ago
        Nova is L4 inspired, and interchangable with L4 kernels in Genode.
        • tptacek 0 minutes ago
          Yep, very similar, but L4 is a little bit more general purpose (despite being microscopically tiny) and a little more battle-tested.
    • traceroute66 36 minutes ago
      > the Nova Microhypevisor approach is correct

      To save people the time:

      "This code is experimental and not feature complete. If it breaks, you get to keep both pieces."

  • markasoftware 15 minutes ago
    This is not a new vulnerability, it's just a description of how to exploit the PwnEscape vulnerability (already discussed at length on HN) in practice on firecracker VMs
    • YetAnotherNick 1 minute ago
      > already discussed at length on HN

      Couldn't find it. Care to provide link.

  • zX41ZdbW 13 minutes ago
    I have a demo service that entirely relies on Firecracker VMs: ClickBench playground, https://benchmark.clickhouse.com/playground/

    It hosts hundreds of database engines - many of them have vulnerabilities, and some of them, like Pandas, are basically open RCEs regardless.

    We can PoC the Firecracker VM Escape on that service.

  • thisisauserid 23 minutes ago
    Firecracker VMs run on AWS. Odd that the article doesn't mention that.
    • whizzter 16 minutes ago
      Firecracker is open source and possibly others use it, AWS sells services with it though.
      • tptacek 8 minutes ago
        (A more complete way to say this is that Firecracker is the engine built to run AWS Lambda and AWS Fargate).
      • tcdent 10 minutes ago
        It has notable adoption in the agent sandbox space where this type of vulnerability is especially volatile.
      • thisisauserid 15 minutes ago
        > The target was Firecracker v1.16.1 on x86-64, with host kernel 7.0.0-1011-aws.
      • wrongquery_dev 0 minutes ago
        [dead]
  • bugfix 19 minutes ago
    [dead]
  • aghadge 43 minutes ago
    it's really informative. At least someone are break it.
  • sscaryterry 21 minutes ago
    This is pure LLM slop.