linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/4] [x86] Add command line option to enable/disable hyper-threading.

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]

Message-Id: <1164989642.5257.938.camel@gullible>
Date:	Fri, 01 Dec 2006 11:14:02 -0500
From:	Ben Collins <ben.collins@...ntu.com>
To:	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
Cc:	Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	torvalds@...l.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] [x86] Add command line option to enable/disable
	hyper-threading.

On Fri, 2006-12-01 at 17:10 +0100, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> > I'm just basing this on the history of the patch, which preceeds me, so
> > if this is incorrect, please don't blame me for misinformation :)
> > 
> > The original patch claims that hyper-threading opens the user up to some
> > sort of security risk involving hardware limitations in protecting
> > memory across the threads. I can't recall all the details.
> > 
> > If this is wrong, I'm more than happy to just drop the whole damn patch.
> 
> that is not correct.
> I suspect what is meant is the "attack" on older openssl versions where
> you could in theory get SOME information about a key in use by snooping
> cache patterns in a shared cache situation. By no means is it a "direct"
> leak of any kind, and openssl has since then been fixed to not have as
> many key-dependent execution streams anymore.
> 
> I would suggest you drop the patch; openssl has been long fixed, and it
> was only a theoretical attack in the first place...
> I'm not saying the attack isn't something that should be addressed.. but
> it is, and disabling hyperthreading is not the right fix.

Thanks for clearing that up. Patch withdrawn.
-
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/