linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 5.5 111/176] KVM: nVMX: Emulate MTF when performing instruction emulation

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]

Date:   Wed, 4 Mar 2020 09:26:13 +0100
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
Cc:     Oliver Upton <oupton@...gle.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5.5 111/176] KVM: nVMX: Emulate MTF when performing
 instruction emulation

On Wed, Mar 04, 2020 at 09:19:09AM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 04/03/20 09:10, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > I'll be glad to just put KVM into the "never apply any patches to
> > stable unless you explicitly mark it as such", but the sad fact is that
> > many recent KVM fixes for reported CVEs never had any "Cc: stable@...r"
> > markings.
> 
> Hmm, I did miss it in 433f4ba1904100da65a311033f17a9bf586b287e and
> acff78477b9b4f26ecdf65733a4ed77fe837e9dc, but that's going back to
> August 2018, so I can do better but it's not too shabby a record. :)

35a571346a94 ("KVM: nVMX: Check IO instruction VM-exit conditions")
e71237d3ff1a ("KVM: nVMX: Refactor IO bitmap checks into helper function")

Were both from a few weeks ago and needed to resolve CVE-2020-2732 :(

> > They only had "Fixes:" tags and so I have had to dig them out
> > of the tree and backport them myself in order to resolve those very
> > public issues.
> > 
> > So can I ask that you always properly tag things for stable?  If so, I
> > will be glad to ignore Fixes: tags for KVM patches in the future.
> > 
> > I'll go drop this patch as well.  Note, there are other KVM patches in
> > this release cycle also, can someone verify that I did not overreach for
> > them as well?
> 
> I checked them and they are fine.

Thank you for that.

greg k-h