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: <caa0b029-038c-cb59-6a69-70c84922fc6f@intel.com>
Date:   Fri, 12 Feb 2021 13:48:36 -0800
From:   Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
To:     Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
Cc:     Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan 
        <sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
        Kirill Shutemov <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
        Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan <knsathya@...nel.org>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
        Raj Ashok <ashok.raj@...el.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC v1 05/26] x86/traps: Add #VE support for TDX guest

On 2/12/21 1:47 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>> What about adding a property to the TD, e.g. via a flag set during TD creation,
>> that controls whether unaccepted accesses cause #VE or are, for all intents and
>> purposes, fatal?  That would allow Linux to pursue treating EPT #VEs for private
>> GPAs as fatal, but would give us a safety and not prevent others from utilizing
>> #VEs.
> That seems reasonable.

Ditto.

We first need to double check to see if the docs are right, though.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ