[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180608155225.GC2525@uranus>
Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 18:52:25 +0300
From: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>
Cc: "H. J. Lu" <hjl.tools@...il.com>,
Dmitry Safonov <dsafonov@...tuozzo.com>,
Yu-cheng Yu <yu-cheng.yu@...el.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
linux-arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"Shanbhogue, Vedvyas" <vedvyas.shanbhogue@...el.com>,
"Ravi V. Shankar" <ravi.v.shankar@...el.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
mike.kravetz@...cle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/10] x86/cet: Add arch_prctl functions for shadow stack
On Fri, Jun 08, 2018 at 07:57:22AM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 8, 2018 at 5:24 AM H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@...il.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 9:38 PM, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org> wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 9:10 PM H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@...il.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 4:01 PM, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org> wrote:
> > >>
> > >
> > > By the time malicious code issue its own syscalls, you've already lost
> > > the battle. I could probably be convinced that a lock-CET-on feature
> > > that applies *only* to the calling thread and is not inherited by
> > > clone() is a decent idea, but I'd want to see someone who understands
> > > the state of the art in exploit design justify it. You're also going
> > > to need to figure out how to make CRIU work if you allow locking CET
> > > on.
> > >
> > > A priori, I think we should just not provide a lock mechanism.
> >
> > We need a door for CET. But it is a very bad idea to leave it open
> > all the time. I don't know much about CRIU, If it is Checkpoint/Restore
> > In Userspace. Can you free any application with AVX512 on AVX512
> > machine and restore it on non-AVX512 machine?
>
> Presumably not -- if the program uses AVX512 and AVX512 goes away,
> then the program won't be happy.
Yes. In most scenarios we require the fpu capability to be the same
on both machines (in case of migration) or/and not being changed
between c/r cycles.
...
> As an aside, where are the latest CET docs? I've found the "CET
> technology preview 2.0", but it doesn't seem to be very clear or
> entirely complete.
+1
Powered by blists - more mailing lists