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
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2018 11:55:52 +0100 From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com> To: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>, tglx@...utronix.de, x86@...nel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, arjan.van.de.ven@...el.com, dave.hansen@...el.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] x86/speculation: Support "Enhanced IBRS" on future CPUs On 13/02/2018 11:53, David Woodhouse wrote: >> You have my vote. :) Really, IBRS_ALL makes no sense and it would be >> nice to know _why_ Intel is pushing something that makes no sense. > No, IBRS_ALL *does* make sense. It's not a complete fix, but it's as > much of a fix as they should shoe-horn into the generation of CPUs > which are currently going to the fabs. > > With IBRS_ALL they presumably add tags to the predictions with the VMX > mode and ring, to give complete protection against predictions being > used in a more privileged mode. Yeah, but I still don't get why they need an MSR to turn those tags on. Is it basically a chicken bit in the wrong direction? Paolo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists