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  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:   Fri, 15 May 2020 03:09:42 +0300
From:   Jarkko Sakkinen <>
To:     Sean Christopherson <>,
        "Dr. Greg" <>
Cc:     Thomas Gleixner <>,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Subject: Re: [PATCH v29 00/20] Intel SGX foundations

On Thu, 2020-05-14 at 09:15 -0700, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> On Thu, May 14, 2020 at 04:16:37AM -0500, Dr. Greg wrote:
> > What we would recommend at this point is that you and Jarkko do the
> > Linux community and beyond a favor and wire up a simple kernel
> > command-line parameter that controls the ability of the driver to be
> > used, ie. enables/disables access to /dev/sgx/enclave.
> I'm not opposed to adding a kernel param to disable SGX.  At one point
> there was a proposal to extend clearcpuid to allow disabling multiple
> feature bits, but it looks like that went the way of the dodo.
> Note, such a param would disable SGX entirely, e.g. clear the feature bit
> in /proc/cpuinfo and prevent any in-kernel SGX code from running.

Greg, you are free to submit a patch for review that adds any possible
kernel command line parameter SGX and beyond. SGX support does not "wire
up" anything that would prevent reviewing such patches.


Powered by blists - more mailing lists