[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87sgfxw10d.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
Date: Mon, 18 May 2020 20:28:50 +0200
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>
Cc: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, bp@...en8.de, luto@...nel.org,
hpa@...or.com, dave.hansen@...el.com, tony.luck@...el.com,
ak@...ux.intel.com, ravi.v.shankar@...el.com,
chang.seok.bae@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v12 00/18] Enable FSGSBASE instructions
Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org> writes:
> On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 11:51:07AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>>Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org> writes:
>>> On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 12:24:14PM +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
>>>>
>>>>Can you put me to the CC-loop for this patches. Some SGX-enabled
>>>>frameworks such as Graphene use out-of-tree changes to achieve this.
>>>>That's where the interest to possibly test this comes from.
>>>
>>> Indeed, we've seen a few hacks that basically just enable FSGSBASE:
>>>
>>> - https://github.com/oscarlab/graphene-sgx-driver
>>> - https://github.com/occlum/enable_rdfsbase
>>
>>I'm really amazed by all these security experts enabling a full root
>>hole. It clearly puts the SGX hypocrisy into perspective.
>
> We can bash Intel all we want here, but sadly there are users in the
This is not about bashing Intel.
> "wild" who just enable these root holes thinking they're secure, and
> those users are the ones running very sensitive workloads. Here's an
> example from a book called "Responsible Genomic Data Sharing":
>
> https://books.google.com/books?id=y6zWDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA184#v=onepage&q&f=false
>
> That explains how to use Graphene-SGX which just enables FSGSBASE with
> root holes.
It's about these SGX promoting security experts which try to tell
everyone else that he has no clue about security.
Thanks,
tglx
Powered by blists - more mailing lists