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  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, 19 Sep 2014 09:14:50 -0400
From:	Josh Boyer <>
To:	Chuck Ebbert <>
Cc:	Borislav Petkov <>,
	Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <>,
	Andy Lutomirski <>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <>,
	"" <>
Subject: Re: x86, microcode: BUG: microcode update that changes x86_capability

On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 8:54 AM, Chuck Ebbert <> wrote:
> On Fri, 19 Sep 2014 13:29:53 +0200
> Borislav Petkov <> wrote:
>> On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 08:00:15AM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
>> > We're also killing microcode update support outside of the initramfs in
>> > Debian.  It has become obvious that anything other than the early initramfs
>> > method of microcode updates should be considered a developer thing.
>> That's simply not true: long-running systems which you can't reboot for
>> whatever reason will need the late microcode update.
> Assuming we can identify all the affected models and steppings, maybe
> something like this would work:
> 1) Refuse to finish booting if a microcode update that disables TSX
> isn't applied before userspace starts running on those CPUs.

How would you accomplish that when applying a microcode update
requires userspace?  Or did you mean "before we transition out of the

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists