linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH -v2.1] x86/msr: Filter MSR writes

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: <20201117212016.GQ5719@zn.tnic>
Date:   Tue, 17 Nov 2020 22:20:16 +0100
From:   Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To:     Mathieu Chouquet-Stringer <me@...hieu.digital>
Cc:     Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...gle.com>,
        Chris Down <chris@...isdown.name>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        sean.j.christopherson@...el.com, tony.luck@...el.com,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>, kernel-team@...com
Subject: Re: [PATCH -v2.1] x86/msr: Filter MSR writes

On Tue, Nov 17, 2020 at 10:00:18PM +0100, Mathieu Chouquet-Stringer wrote:
> I'm late to the party but it seems allowing MSR_IA32_ENERGY_PERF_BIAS
> has the downside of flagging the kernel as tainted without telling you
> why if you use something like x86_energy_perf_policy (from
> tools/power/x86/x86_energy_perf_policy) which itself is used by tuned.

Not for long:

https://git.kernel.org/tip/fe0a5788624c8b8f113a35bbe4636e37f9321241

> So while both documentation and tools should be updated as to be clearer
> and to not taint the kernel respectively, there's something that remains
> to be done to explain why or how the kernel got tainted because of
> poking into MSRs...

Because if you poke at random MSRs and you manage to "configure" your
CPU to run "out of spec" - this is what the taint flag is called:
TAINT_CPU_OUT_OF_SPEC - then this is exactly the case you've created: a
CPU executing outside of specifications.

I agree with the update-the-documentation aspect - S does not mean only
SMP kernel on !SMP-capable CPU but the more general, CPU is out of spec.

Thx.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette