linux-kernel - Re: [patch 01/24] x86/speculation: Update the TIF

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: <9cbce8e5-bc0d-a817-04f5-57b9f8ec0f70@linux.intel.com>
Date:   Wed, 21 Nov 2018 14:55:20 -0800
From:   Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Linux List Kernel Mailing <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Andrew Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>, thomas.lendacky@....com,
        Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
        Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
        David Woodhouse <dwmw@...zon.co.uk>,
        Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>, dave.hansen@...el.com,
        Casey Schaufler <casey.schaufler@...el.com>,
        "Mallick, Asit K" <asit.k.mallick@...el.com>, jcm@...hat.com,
        longman9394@...il.com, Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        david.c.stewart@...el.com, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [patch 01/24] x86/speculation: Update the TIF_SSBD comment

On 11/21/2018 2:53 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 11:48:41PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>> Btw, I really do not like the app2app wording. I'd rather go for usr2usr,
>> but that's kinda horrible as well. But then, all of this is horrible.
>>
>> Any better ideas?
> 
> It needs to have "task isolation" in there somewhere as this is what it
> does, practically. But it needs to be more precise as in "isolates the
> tasks from influence due to shared hardware." :)
> 

part of the problem is that "sharing" has multiple dimensions: time and space (e.g. hyperthreading)
which makes it hard to find a nice term for it other than describing who attacks whom