linux-kernel - Re: [tip:x86/setup] x86, setup: "glove box" BIOS calls -- infrastructure

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 10 Apr 2009 13:38:24 +0200
From:	Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc:	Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>, mingo@...hat.com, hpa@...or.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
	hpa@...ux.intel.com, rjw@...k.pl,
	linux-tip-commits@...r.kernel.org,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [tip:x86/setup] x86, setup: "glove box" BIOS calls --
	infrastructure

Hi!

> > Well, difference is that you can defend against arbitrary network 
> > packet, but you can't defend against arbitrarily broken BIOS. If 
> > it loops forever, or overwrites random memory place, we lost...
> 
> We could protect against random memory corruption too, if it ever 
> became a widespread problem: by executing the BIOS call in a virtual 
> machine. (We can probably use the KVM code to properly emulate big 
> real mode, etc.)

We already have problems where bios corrupts low memory area during
suspend/resume. Not sure how KVM helps.

Anyway I do agree with the patches.

> "BIOS people" are operating in a completely different culture. Time 
> to market, hardware workarounds, short-term differentiators, secret 
> bootstrap sequences and code compactness are king in that space. 
> Code quality is dead last in the list. I strongly doubt that given 
> the radically conflicting priorities a reasonable dialogue can be 
> established.

"BIOS people" control stuff like SMM mode. We can workaround some BIOS
problems, but definitely not all of them.

For servers, I guess Linux has enough of market share that we could
certify known-good servers (and maybe warn against known-bad).
									Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/