linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v30 04/20] x86/sgx: Add SGX microarchitectural data structures

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <b3a48fc26bbb680273fc744f930dcfed5e503829.camel@linux.intel.com>
Date:   Wed, 27 May 2020 22:43:28 +0300
From:   Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Cc:     Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@...el.com>,
        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,
        tglx@...utronix.de, kai.svahn@...el.com, josh@...htriplett.org,
        luto@...nel.org, kai.huang@...el.com, rientjes@...gle.com,
        cedric.xing@...el.com, puiterwijk@...hat.com,
        Jethro Beekman <jethro@...tanix.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v30 04/20] x86/sgx: Add SGX microarchitectural data
 structures

On Mon, 2020-05-25 at 10:20 +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Fri, May 22, 2020 at 10:50:17PM +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> > If other values except two are never going to be used it is more than a
> > legit point to validate this field.
> > 
> > It also the potential to use ~0x8086 bits to be defined later if ever
> > needed lets say for some kernel specific purpose.
> 
> Yah, let's cover our ass for the future. We have all seen the "this
> won't be used" but then "we're using it" change of heart. IOW, let's
> align with what the hw checks and we can always relax that in the future
> but not the other way around.
> 
I fully agree with this conclusion and that is exactly how I think about
the issue too. I'll add a check for this.

/Jarkko