linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/5] x86/boot/compressed/64: Check SEV encryption in 64-bit boot-path

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20201020154408.GA22179@suse.de>
Date:   Tue, 20 Oct 2020 17:44:08 +0200
From:   Joerg Roedel <jroedel@...e.de>
To:     Arvind Sankar <nivedita@...m.mit.edu>
Cc:     Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>, x86@...nel.org,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Martin Radev <martin.b.radev@...il.com>,
        Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] x86/boot/compressed/64: Check SEV encryption in
 64-bit boot-path

On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 10:33:12AM -0400, Arvind Sankar wrote:
> That doesn't feel like a big loss: if a malicious hypervisor wanted to
> induce completely random code execution, it can do that anyway by just
> messing with the guest-to-host translation, no?

Yes, but relying on defined behavior is still better. Undefined behavior
could also mean it jumps to some other code which then leaks data.

Regards,

	Joerg