linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v20 00/28] Intel SGX1 support

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: <088e39dc-025a-1dea-4f26-239d5c059d6a@intel.com>
Date:   Fri, 19 Apr 2019 09:39:03 -0700
From:   Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
To:     "Dr. Greg" <greg@...ellic.com>
Cc:     Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com>,
        torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        x86@...nel.org, linux-sgx@...r.kernel.org,
        akpm@...ux-foundation.org, sean.j.christopherson@...el.com,
        nhorman@...hat.com, npmccallum@...hat.com, serge.ayoun@...el.com,
        shay.katz-zamir@...el.com, haitao.huang@...el.com,
        andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com, tglx@...utronix.de,
        kai.svahn@...el.com, bp@...en8.de, josh@...htriplett.org,
        luto@...nel.org, kai.huang@...el.com, rientjes@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v20 00/28] Intel SGX1 support

On 4/19/19 9:24 AM, Dr. Greg wrote:
>> Companies ideally shouldn't be getting their customers hooked on
>> out-of-tree ABIs and customers should consume out-of-tree ABIs
>> *expecting* them to break in the future.
> At the risk of being indelicate, it was your company that hooked the
> SGX development community on out-of-tree driver ABI's and software.

I would encourage anyone who has been impacted by this to communicate
that back to the folks at Intel from whom they received the out-of-tree
code about the impact.

> Is there going to be an OEM mandated requirement, enforced by Intel
> licensing, that all SGX capable platforms will implement Flexible
> Launch Control?
Heck if I know.  I don't think LKML is a great place to discuss Intel
licensing requirements.

What I *do* know is that when builds a platform without Flexible Launch
Control, Linux does not support SGX on that platform.  I guess that
could be spelled out in some documentation explicitly, if it isn't already.