linux-kernel - Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH -tip 0/2] x86: Prohibit kprobes on XEN_EMULATE

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: <20190905104937.60aa03f699a9c0fbf1b651b9@kernel.org>
Date:   Thu, 5 Sep 2019 10:49:37 +0900
From:   Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>
To:     Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@...rix.com>
Cc:     Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>,
        Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@...nel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>, <x86@...nel.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
        <xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org>,
        Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH -tip 0/2] x86: Prohibit kprobes on
 XEN_EMULATE_PREFIX

On Wed, 4 Sep 2019 12:54:55 +0100
Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@...rix.com> wrote:

> On 04/09/2019 12:45, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > These patches allow x86 instruction decoder to decode
> > xen-cpuid which has XEN_EMULATE_PREFIX, and prohibit
> > kprobes to probe on it.
> >
> > Josh reported that the objtool can not decode such special
> > prefixed instructions, and I found that we also have to
> > prohibit kprobes to probe on such instruction.
> >
> > This series can be applied on -tip master branch which
> > has merged Josh's objtool/perf sharing common x86 insn
> > decoder series.
> 
> The paravirtualised xen-cpuid is were you'll see it most in a regular
> kernel, but be aware that it is also used for testing purposes in other
> circumstances, and there is an equivalent KVM prefix which is used for
> KVM testing.

Good catch! I didn't notice that. Is that really same sequance or KVM uses
another sequence of instructions for KVM prefix?

> 
> It might be better to generalise the decode support to "virtualisation
> escape prefix" or something slightly more generic.

Agreed, it is easy to expand it, we can switch the prefix template.
Could you tell me where I should look? I will add it.

Thank you,


> 
> ~Andrew


-- 
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>