linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] KVM: X86: Fix the decoding of segment overrides in 64bit mode

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]

Message-ID: <46ef9359-a87c-224c-53e0-c948b79314a8@redhat.com>
Date:   Fri, 23 Mar 2018 16:04:20 +0100
From:   Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
To:     Wanpeng Li <kernellwp@...il.com>,
        Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@...rix.com>
Cc:     LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, kvm <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
        Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: X86: Fix the decoding of segment overrides in 64bit
 mode

On 23/03/2018 15:27, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> 2018-03-22 21:53 GMT+08:00 Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@...rix.com>:
>> On 22/03/18 13:39, Wanpeng Li wrote:
>>> 2018-03-22 20:38 GMT+08:00 Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>:
>>>> On 22/03/2018 12:04, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>>>>> We've got a Force Emulation Prefix (ud2a; .ascii "xen") for doing
>>>>> magic.  Originally, this was used for PV guests to explicitly request an
>>>>> emulated CPUID, but I extended it to HVM guests for "emulate the next
>>>>> instruction", after we had some guest user => guest kernel privilege
>>>>> escalations because of incorrect emulation.
>>>> Wanpeng, why don't you add it behind a new kvm module parameter? :)
>>> Great point! I will have a try. Thanks Paolo and Andrew. :)
>>
>> Using the force emulation prefix requires intercepting #UD, which is in
>> general a BadThing(tm) for security.  Therefore, we have a build time
> 
> Yeah, however kvm intercepts and emulates #UD by default, should we
> add a new kvm module parameter to enable it and disable by default?

No, the module parameter should only be about the force-emulation prefix.

Paolo