linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/4] x86/cpufeature: Add User-Mode Instruction Prevention definitions

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, 11 Nov 2016 10:06:44 -0800
From:   Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Ricardo Neri <ricardo.neri-calderon@...ux.intel.com>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>
Cc:     Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
        "linux-doc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>,
        Chen Yucong <slaoub@...il.com>,
        Chris Metcalf <cmetcalf@...lanox.com>,
        Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@...el.com>,
        Huang Rui <ray.huang@....com>, Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        "Michael S . Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>,
        Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@...driver.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        "Ravi V . Shankar" <ravi.v.shankar@...el.com>,
        Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>, Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] x86/cpufeature: Add User-Mode Instruction Prevention
 definitions

On 11/10/2016 08:08 PM, Ricardo Neri wrote:
> Thanks for the suggestions. Perhaps I can include these metrics in my
> V2. On th other hand, Dave Hansen gave a good argument on potential
> conflicts when, of instance running on an AMD CPU. UMIP is enabled by
> setting a bit in CR4. If that bit is not supposed to be set, that could
> cause a #GP fault.

I just meant that some folks probably appreciate being able to build out
all the Intel-specific features.  Not that it causes a functional problem.