[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20180124072953.50851fec@mschwideX1>
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2018 07:29:53 +0100
From: Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>
To: Dominik Brodowski <linux@...inikbrodowski.net>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org,
kvm@...r.kernel.org, Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>,
Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
Cornelia Huck <cohuck@...hat.com>,
David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Jon Masters <jcm@...hat.com>,
Marcus Meissner <meissner@...e.de>,
Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>, w@....eu, keescook@...omium.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] prctl: add PR_ISOLATE_BP process control
On Tue, 23 Jan 2018 18:07:19 +0100
Dominik Brodowski <linux@...inikbrodowski.net> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 02:07:01PM +0100, Martin Schwidefsky wrote:
> > Add the PR_ISOLATE_BP operation to prctl. The effect of the process
> > control is to make all branch prediction entries created by the execution
> > of the user space code of this task not applicable to kernel code or the
> > code of any other task.
>
> What is the rationale for requiring a per-process *opt-in* for this added
> protection?
>
> For KPTI on x86, the exact opposite approach is being discussed (see, e.g.
> http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1515612500-14505-1-git-send-email-w@1wt.eu ): By
> default, play it safe, with KPTI enabled. But for "trusted" processes, one
> may opt out using prctrl.
The rationale is that there are cases where you got code from *somewhere*
and want to run it in an isolated context. Think: a docker container that
runs under KVM. But with spectre this is still not really safe. So you
include a wrapper program in the docker container to use the trap door
prctl to start the potential malicious program. Now you should be good, no?
--
blue skies,
Martin.
"Reality continues to ruin my life." - Calvin.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists