linux-kernel - Re: [patch V2 27/28] x86/speculation: Add seccomp Spectre v2 user space protection 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: <CAHk-=wj7h=eCrvEPuO_AJ2Y5T5akTQPs5cLA811O64wORf+NyQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 4 Dec 2018 09:20:52 -0800
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        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>,
        "Van De Ven, Arjan" <arjan@...ux.intel.com>, jcm@...hat.com,
        longman9394@...il.com, Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        david.c.stewart@...el.com, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        jason.w.brandt@...el.com
Subject: Re: [patch V2 27/28] x86/speculation: Add seccomp Spectre v2 user
 space protection mode

On Mon, Dec 3, 2018 at 5:38 PM Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
>
> To make the usage of STIBP and its working principles clear,
> here are some additional explanations of STIBP from our Intel
> HW architects.  This should also help answer some of the questions
> from Thomas and others on STIBP's usages with IBPB and IBRS.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Tim
>
> ---
>
> STIBP
> ^^^^^
> Implementations of STIBP on existing Core-family processors (where STIBP
> functionality was added through a microcode update) work by disabling
> branch predictors that both:
>
>     1. Contain indirect branch predictions for both hardware threads, and
>     2. Do not contain a dedicated thread ID bit

Honestly, it still feels entirely misguided to me.

The above is not STIBP. It's just "disable IB". There's nothing "ST" about it.

So on processors where there is no thread ID bit (or per-thread
predictors), Intel simply SHOULD NOT EXPOSE this at all.

As it is, I refuse to call this shit "STIBP", because on current CPU's
that's simply a lie.

Being "technically correct" is not an excuse. It's just lying. I would
really hope that we restrict the lying to politicians, and not do it
in technical documentation.

               Linus