linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/6] x86/sgx: Do not consider unsanitized pages an error

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 1 Sep 2022 22:41:54 +0000
From:   "Huang, Kai" <kai.huang@...el.com>
To:     "jarkko@...nel.org" <jarkko@...nel.org>
CC:     "pmenzel@...gen.mpg.de" <pmenzel@...gen.mpg.de>,
        "Hansen, Dave" <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
        "linux-sgx@...r.kernel.org" <linux-sgx@...r.kernel.org>,
        "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
        "dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com" <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        "Dhanraj, Vijay" <vijay.dhanraj@...el.com>,
        "Chatre, Reinette" <reinette.chatre@...el.com>,
        "mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
        "tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        "bp@...en8.de" <bp@...en8.de>,
        "haitao.huang@...ux.intel.com" <haitao.huang@...ux.intel.com>,
        "hpa@...or.com" <hpa@...or.com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] x86/sgx: Do not consider unsanitized pages an error

On Fri, 2022-09-02 at 01:27 +0300, jarkko@...nel.org wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 31, 2022 at 08:42:59PM +0000, Huang, Kai wrote:
> > On Wed, 2022-08-31 at 11:35 -0700, Dave Hansen wrote:
> > > Jarkko, Kai and Haitao,
> > > 
> > > Can you three please start trimming your replies?  You don't need to and
> > > should not quote the entirety of your messages every time you reply.
> > > 
> > > On 8/31/22 11:28, jarkko@...nel.org wrote:
> > > > > Will it cause racing if we expose dev nodes to user space before
> > > > > ksgxd is started and sensitization done?
> > > > I'll to explain this.
> > > > 
> > > > So the point is to fix the issue at hand, and fix it locally.
> > > > 
> > > > Changing initialization order is simply out of context. It's
> > > > not really an argument for or against changing it
> > > > 
> > > > We are fixing sanitization here, and only that with zero
> > > > side-effects to any other semantics.
> > > > 
> > > > It's dictated by the development process [*] but more
> > > > importantly it's also just plain common sense.
> > > 
> > > Kai, I think your suggestion is reasonable.  You make a good point about
> > > not needing ksgxd for vepc.
> > > 
> > > *But*, I think it's a bit too much for a bugfix that's headed to
> > > -stable.  I'm concerned that it will have unintended side effects,
> > > *especially* when there's a working, tested alternative.
> > 
> > Agreed. Thanks Dave/Jarkko.
> 
> Please do a patch. It's a very reasonable suggestion when
> considered out of context of this bug.
> 
> If you go really rigid with this, the compilation process
> should not compile in sanitization process in the case when
> only vepc is enabled. It's useless functionality in that
> case.
> 
> BR, Jarkko

Yeah I am planning to work out one to see how it goes.

-- 
Thanks,
-Kai