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: <20140623141626.GB8178@tassilo.jf.intel.com>
Date:	Mon, 23 Jun 2014 07:16:26 -0700
From:	Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:	Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"mingo@...e.hu" <mingo@...e.hu>, Joe Mario <jmario@...hat.com>,
	Don Zickus <dzickus@...hat.com>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] perf/x86: update Haswell PEBS event constraints

On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 09:35:00AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 01:40:41PM -0700, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 10:31:29PM +0200, Stephane Eranian wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 10:18 PM, Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> > > >> I don't quite understand that.
> > > >> You need to know which events support PEBS. You need a table
> > > >
> > > > We're talking about the kernel allowing things here.
> > > > Yes the user still needs to know what supports PEBS, but
> > > > that doesn't concern the kernel.
> > > >
> > > Just need to make sure you don't return bogus information.
> > 
> > GIGO. We only need to prevent security issues.
> 
> > Yes if the user specifies a bogus raw event it will not count.
> > That's fine. The important part is just that nothing ever crashes.
> 
> Right. But IIRC you were previously arguing that we can in fact crash
> the machine with raw PEBS events, as illustrated with the SNB PEBS
> cycles 'event'.

The potential problem could only happen for a recognized PEBS event/umask,
but with unsupported flag combinations. That is what the SDM warns
about in 18.8.4.

If the event is not recognized as PEBS it will just effectively 
disable the event.

> Which is where my strict_pebs patch came from; by default only allow the
> sanitized known-safe list of events, but allow the system administrator
> to disable that test and allow any PEBS event.

I don't think we need to enforce the list of events
(except for the few with special limited counters)

-Andi

-- 
ak@...ux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only
--
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/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ