[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1516990288.30244.253.camel@infradead.org>
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2018 18:11:28 +0000
From: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>
To: Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
Liran Alon <liran.alon@...cle.com>,
Laura Abbott <labbott@...hat.com>,
Andrew Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Janakarajan Natarajan <Janakarajan.Natarajan@....com>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>,
"Mallick, Asit K" <asit.k.mallick@...el.com>,
Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@...hat.com>,
KarimAllah Ahmed <karahmed@...zon.de>,
Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com>,
Jun Nakajima <jun.nakajima@...el.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>,
Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@...el.com>,
"Van De Ven, Arjan" <arjan.van.de.ven@...el.com>,
Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>,
Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
KVM list <kvm@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC 09/10] x86/enter: Create macros to restrict/unrestrict
Indirect Branch Speculation
On Fri, 2018-01-26 at 09:59 -0800, Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 09:19:09AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 1:11 AM, David Woodhouse wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > Do we need to look again at the fact that we've disabled the RSB-
> > > stuffing for SMEP?
> > Absolutely. SMEP helps make people a lot less worried about things,
> > but it doesn't fix the "BTB only contains partial addresses" case.
> >
> > But did we do that "disable stuffing with SMEP"? I'm not seeing it. In
> > my tree, it's only conditional on X86_FEATURE_RETPOLINE.
>
> For Skylake we need RSB stuffing even with SMEP to avoid falling back to the
> BTB on underflow.
I am *actively* ignoring Skylake right now. This is about per-SKL
userspace even with SMEP, because we think Intel's document lies to us.
If the RSB only holds the low bits of the target, then a userspace
attacker can populate an RSB entry which points to a kernel gadget of
her choice, even with SMEP or KPTI enabled.
Download attachment "smime.p7s" of type "application/x-pkcs7-signature" (5213 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists