linux-kernel - Re: Subject: [PATCH 0/1] SGX self test fails

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]

Date:   Thu, 29 Apr 2021 11:55:23 -0700
From:   Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
To:     Tim Gardner <tim.gardner@...onical.com>,
        dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com
Cc:     jarkko@...nel.org, shuah@...nel.org, linux-sgx@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Subject: [PATCH 0/1] SGX self test fails

On 4/29/21 11:39 AM, Tim Gardner wrote:
> I'm just starting my learning curve on SGX, so I don't know if I've missed
> some setup for the SGX device entries. After looking at arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/driver.c
> I see that there is no mode value for either sgx_dev_enclave or sgx_dev_provision.
> 
> With this patch I can get the SGX self test to complete:
> 
> sudo ./test_sgx
> Warning: no execute permissions on device file /dev/sgx_enclave
> 0x0000000000000000 0x0000000000002000 0x03
> 0x0000000000002000 0x0000000000001000 0x05
> 0x0000000000003000 0x0000000000003000 0x03
> SUCCESS
> 
> Is the warning even necessary ?

Dang, I just added that warning.  I thought it was necessary, but I
guess not:

$ ls -l /dev/sgx_enclave
crw------- 1 dave dave 10, 125 Apr 28 11:32 /dev/sgx_enclave
$ ./test_sgx
0x0000000000000000 0x0000000000002000 0x03
0x0000000000002000 0x0000000000001000 0x05
0x0000000000003000 0x0000000000003000 0x03
SUCCESS

*But*, is that OK?  Should we be happily creating a PROT_EXEC mapping on
a ugo-x file?  Why were we respecting noexec on the filesystem but not
ugo-x on the file?