linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 11/11] intel

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]

Date:   Tue, 21 Nov 2017 01:41:45 +0200
From:   Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Cc:     intel-sgx-kernel-dev@...ts.01.org,
        platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 11/11] intel_sgx: driver documentation

On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 11:42:56PM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 12:37:41AM +0200, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> > Firmware cannot access the memory inside an enclave. CPU asserts every
> > memory access coming outside the enclave.
> 
> But "firmware could potentially configure the root key hash for the
> enclave." How about the owner configures the root key hash instead?
> Along with deciding whether to lock down the feature control register or


In potential deployments of SGX, the owner could do this either in the
firmware level or OS level depending whether the MSRs are configured as
writable in the feature control.

One option would be to have a config flag to decide whether to require
MSRs to be writable or not.

/Jarkko