linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 1/6] x86: KVM: Advertise CMPccXADD CPUID to user space

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:   Mon, 21 Nov 2022 20:50:24 +0100
From:   Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To:     Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
Cc:     Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
        Jiaxi Chen <jiaxi.chen@...ux.intel.com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com, dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com,
        x86@...nel.org, hpa@...or.com, pbonzini@...hat.com,
        ndesaulniers@...gle.com, alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com,
        peterz@...radead.org, jpoimboe@...nel.org,
        chang.seok.bae@...el.com, pawan.kumar.gupta@...ux.intel.com,
        babu.moger@....com, jmattson@...gle.com, sandipan.das@....com,
        tony.luck@...el.com, sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com,
        fenghua.yu@...el.com, keescook@...omium.org, nathan@...nel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/6] x86: KVM: Advertise CMPccXADD CPUID to user space

On Mon, Nov 21, 2022 at 05:28:39PM +0000, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> Yes.  Most userspace VMMs sanitize their CPUID models based on KVM_GET_SUPPORTED_CPUID,
> e.g. by default, QEMU will refuse to enable features in guest CPUID that aren't
> reported as supported by KVM.
> 
> Another use case is for userspace to blindly use the result of KVM_GET_SUPPORTED_CPUID
> as the guest's CPUID model, e.g. for using KVM to isolate code as opposed to standing
> up a traditional virtual machine.  For that use case, userspace again relies on KVM to
> enumerate support.

Ah ok, thx.

/me makes a mental note.

> What I was trying to call out in the above is that the KVM "enabling" technically
> doesn't expose the feature to the guest.  E.g. a clever guest could ignore CPUID
> and probe the relevant instructions manually by seeing whether or not they #UD.

As can a nasty userspace on baremetal. That's why /proc/cpuinfo is not
really the authority of what's supported and we're going away from
treating it that way.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette