linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 20/24] crypto: x86/ciphers

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: <Y3TJ1e3FzsO5Cae8@zx2c4.com>
Date:   Wed, 16 Nov 2022 12:30:29 +0100
From:   "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@...c4.com>
To:     Robert Elliott <elliott@....com>
Cc:     herbert@...dor.apana.org.au, davem@...emloft.net,
        tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com, ap420073@...il.com, ardb@...nel.org,
        David.Laight@...LAB.COM, ebiggers@...nel.org,
        linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 20/24] crypto: x86/ciphers - load based on CPU features

On Tue, Nov 15, 2022 at 10:13:38PM -0600, Robert Elliott wrote:
> diff --git a/arch/x86/crypto/curve25519-x86_64.c b/arch/x86/crypto/curve25519-x86_64.c
> index d55fa9e9b9e6..ae7536b17bf9 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/crypto/curve25519-x86_64.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/crypto/curve25519-x86_64.c
> @@ -12,7 +12,7 @@
>  #include <linux/kernel.h>
>  #include <linux/module.h>
>  #include <linux/scatterlist.h>
> -
> +#include <asm/cpu_device_id.h>
>  #include <asm/cpufeature.h>
>  #include <asm/processor.h>
>  
> @@ -1697,13 +1697,22 @@ static struct kpp_alg curve25519_alg = {
>  	.max_size		= curve25519_max_size,
>  };
>  
> +static const struct x86_cpu_id module_cpu_ids[] = {
> +	X86_MATCH_FEATURE(X86_FEATURE_ADX, NULL),
> +	{}
> +};
> +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(x86cpu, module_cpu_ids);
>  
>  static int __init curve25519_mod_init(void)
>  {
> -	if (boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_BMI2) && boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_ADX))
> -		static_branch_enable(&curve25519_use_bmi2_adx);
> -	else
> -		return 0;
> +	if (!x86_match_cpu(module_cpu_ids))
> +		return -ENODEV;
> +
> +	if (!boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_BMI2))
> +		return -ENODEV;
> +
> +	static_branch_enable(&curve25519_use_bmi2_adx);

Can the user still insmod this? If so, you can't remove the ADX check.
Ditto for rest of patch.