linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] KVM: VMX: validate individual bits of guest MSR_IA32_FEATURE

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: <20160616112951.vt67sjbktozltb5t@hz-desktop>
Date:	Thu, 16 Jun 2016 19:29:51 +0800
From:	Haozhong Zhang <haozhong.zhang@...el.com>
To:	Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
Cc:	kvm@...r.kernel.org, rkrcmar@...hat.com,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	"H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, x86@...nel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Gleb Natapov <gleb@...nel.org>,
	Boris Petkov <bp@...e.de>, Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
	Andi Kleen <andi.kleen@...el.com>,
	Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] KVM: VMX: validate individual bits of guest
 MSR_IA32_FEATURE_CONTROL

On 06/16/16 13:19, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> 
> 
> On 16/06/2016 13:16, Haozhong Zhang wrote:
> >> However, I think FEATURE_CONTROL_LOCKED should always be writable.  If
> >> you change that, it's simpler to just do |= and &= in the caller.
> > 
> > These two functions (add/del) are to prevent callers from forgetting
> > setting/clearing FEATURE_CONTROL_LOCKED in
> > msr_ia32_feature_control_valid_bits: it should be set if any feature
> > bit is set, and be cleared if all feature bits are cleared. The second
> > rule could relaxed as we can always present MSR_IA32_FEATURE_CONTROL
> > to guest.
> 
> Yes, this means that FEATURE_CONTROL_LOCKED effectively is always valid.
>  So you end up with just &= to clear and |= to set.
> 
> > I'm okey to let callers take care for the locked bit.
> > 
> >>> +	to_vmx(vcpu)->msr_ia32_feature_control_valid_bits |=
> >>> +		bits | FEATURE_CONTROL_LOCKED;
> >>> +}
> >>> +
> >>> +static void feature_control_valid_bits_del(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, uint64_t bits)
> >>> +{
> >>> +	uint64_t *valid_bits =
> >>> +		&to_vmx(vcpu)->msr_ia32_feature_control_valid_bits;
> >>> +	ASSERT(!(bits & ~FEATURE_CONTROL_MAX_VALID_BITS));
> >>> +	*valid_bits &= ~bits;
> >>> +	if (!(*valid_bits & ~FEATURE_CONTROL_LOCKED))
> >>> +		*valid_bits = 0;
> >>> +}
> >>> +
> >>>  #define VMCS12_OFFSET(x) offsetof(struct vmcs12, x)
> >>>  #define FIELD(number, name)	[number] = VMCS12_OFFSET(name)
> >>>  #define FIELD64(number, name)	[number] = VMCS12_OFFSET(name), \
> >>> @@ -2864,6 +2897,14 @@ static int vmx_get_vmx_msr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u32 msr_index, u64 *pdata)
> >>>  	return 0;
> >>>  }
> >>>  
> >>> +static inline bool vmx_feature_control_msr_valid(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
> >>> +						 uint64_t val)
> >>> +{
> >>> +	uint64_t valid_bits = to_vmx(vcpu)->msr_ia32_feature_control_valid_bits;
> >>> +
> >>> +	return valid_bits && !(val & ~valid_bits);
> >>> +}
> >>>  /*
> >>>   * Reads an msr value (of 'msr_index') into 'pdata'.
> >>>   * Returns 0 on success, non-0 otherwise.
> >>> @@ -2906,7 +2947,7 @@ static int vmx_get_msr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct msr_data *msr_info)
> >>>  		msr_info->data = vmcs_read64(GUEST_BNDCFGS);
> >>>  		break;
> >>>  	case MSR_IA32_FEATURE_CONTROL:
> >>> -		if (!nested_vmx_allowed(vcpu))
> >>> +		if (!vmx_feature_control_msr_valid(vcpu, 0))
> >>
> >> You can remove this if completely in patch 1.  It's okay to make the MSR
> >> always available.
> >>
> > 
> > But then it also allows all bits to be set by guests, even though some
> > features are not available.
> 
> Note that this is "get".  Of course the "if" must stay in vmx_set_msr.
>

My mistake. I'll remove it in patch 1.

Thanks,
Haozhong