linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v29 00/20] Intel SGX foundations

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: <fa1465e6fc3e8f40330673b28137e92755bf1fa7.camel@linux.intel.com>
Date:   Fri, 15 May 2020 03:09:42 +0300
From:   Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@...el.com>,
        "Dr. Greg" <greg@...ellic.com>
Cc:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        x86@...nel.org, linux-sgx@...r.kernel.org,
        akpm@...ux-foundation.org, dave.hansen@...el.com,
        nhorman@...hat.com, npmccallum@...hat.com, haitao.huang@...el.com,
        andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com, kai.svahn@...el.com,
        bp@...en8.de, josh@...htriplett.org, luto@...nel.org,
        kai.huang@...el.com, rientjes@...gle.com, cedric.xing@...el.com,
        puiterwijk@...hat.com
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.

/Jarkko