linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 1/1] x86/tdx: Handle MWAIT, MONITOR and WBINVD

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: <20210401032827.GI1285835@tassilo.jf.intel.com>
Date:   Wed, 31 Mar 2021 20:28:27 -0700
From:   Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
Cc:     "Kuppuswamy, Sathyanarayanan" 
        <sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com>,
        Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        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>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/1] x86/tdx: Handle MWAIT, MONITOR and WBINVD

> The hardware (and VMMs and SEAM) have ways of telling the guest kernel
> what is supported: CPUID.  If it screws up, and the guest gets an
> unexpected #VE, so be it.

The main reason for disabling stuff is actually that we don't need
to harden it. All these things are potential attack paths.

> 
> We don't have all kinds of crazy handling in the kernel's #UD handler
> just in case a CPU mis-enumerates a feature and we get a #UD.  We have
> to trust the underlying hardware to be sane.  If it isn't, we die a
> horrible death as fast as possible.  Why should TDX be any different?

That's what the original patch did -- no unnecessary checks -- but reviewers
keep asking for the extra checks, so Sathya added more. We have the not
unusual problem here that reviewers don't agree among themselves.

-Andi