[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CALMp9eSovFPZOmztDtzcf0BnkoV1=4ua1ymOfuEg0K7acug24A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2019 16:03:35 -0800
From: Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>
To: Tom Roeder <tmroeder@...gle.com>
Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@...hat.com>,
Liran Alon <liran.alon@...cle.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
"H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
"the arch/x86 maintainers" <x86@...nel.org>,
kvm list <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
syzbot+ded1696f6b50b615b630@...kaller.appspotmail.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] kvm: x86/vmx: Use kzalloc for cached_vmcs12
On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 3:48 PM Tom Roeder <tmroeder@...gle.com> wrote:
>
> This changes the allocation of cached_vmcs12 to use kzalloc instead of
> kmalloc. This removes the information leak found by Syzkaller (see
> Reported-by) in this case and prevents similar leaks from happening
> based on cached_vmcs12.
>
> The email from Syszkaller led to a discussion about a patch in early
> November on the KVM list (I've made this a reply to that thread), but
> the current upstream kernel still has kmalloc instead of kzalloc for
> cached_vmcs12 and cached_shadow_vmcs12. This RFC proposes changing to
> kzalloc for defense in depth.
>
> Tested: rebuilt but not tested, since this is an RFC
>
> Reported-by: syzbot+ded1696f6b50b615b630@...kaller.appspotmail.com
> Signed-off-by: Tom Roeder <tmroeder@...gle.com>
Reviewed-by: Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists