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  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:   Thu, 23 Feb 2017 17:03:49 +0100
From:   Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To:     hpa@...or.com
Cc:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, arjan@...ux.intel.com,
        jpoimboe@...hat.com, richard.weinberger@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: Implement __WARN using UD0

On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 07:32:07AM -0800, hpa@...or.com wrote:
> Well, once you are using invalid instructions, it depends not on
> what the CPU decodes but what your own handler expects. Consider
> Microsoft's use of C4 C4 /ib as a meta-instruction (called BOP, "BIOS
> operation")... that format has nothing to do with the CPU, but if you
> want to disassemble the resulting code you need to know about how they
> encode BOP.

How do they use that?

They rely on the fact that C4 C4 is going to #UD as it is an invalid VEX
insn? The second C4 selecting the 100b map which is reserved?

Or?

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists