[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180104205654.GE10427@amd>
Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2018 21:56:54 +0100
From: Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Cc: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
"torvalds@...ux-foundation.org" <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"peterz@...radead.org" <peterz@...radead.org>,
"tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"alan@...ux.intel.com" <alan@...ux.intel.com>,
"Reshetova, Elena" <elena.reshetova@...el.com>,
"mark.rutland@....com" <mark.rutland@....com>,
"gnomes@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk" <gnomes@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
"gregkh@...uxfoundation.org" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
"jikos@...nel.org" <jikos@...nel.org>,
"linux-arch@...r.kernel.org" <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] asm/generic: introduce if_nospec and nospec_barrier
Hi!
> > It falls there so that the cpu only issues reads with known good 'index' values.
> >
> >> I suspect it would be better to have those barriers in the tun/tap
> >> interfaces where userspace can inject packets and thus time them. Then
> >> the code could still speculate and go fast for remote packets.
> >>
> >> Or does the speculation stomping have to be immediately at the place
> >> where we use data from userspace to perform a table lookup?
> >
> > The speculation stomping barrier has to be between where we validate
> > the input and when we may speculate on invalid input.
>
> So a serializing instruction at the kernel/user boundary (like say
> loading cr3) is not enough? That would seem to break any chance of a
> controlled timing.
Timing attack is not as straightforward as this.
You can assume cache snooping from second CPU _while_ kernel is
executing. Yes, that will mean timing, but....
Best regards,
Pavel
--
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (182 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists