linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] cdrom: Fix spectre-v1 gadget

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: <20230616031447.yslq6ep7lxe6sjv4@desk>
Date:   Thu, 15 Jun 2023 20:14:47 -0700
From:   Pawan Gupta <pawan.kumar.gupta@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Phillip Potter <phil@...lpotter.co.uk>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, jordyzomer@...gle.com,
        linux-block@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] cdrom: Fix spectre-v1 gadget

On Fri, Jun 16, 2023 at 12:31:50AM +0100, Phillip Potter wrote:
> I've now looked at this. It is possible for cdi->capacity to be > 1, as
> it is set via get_capabilities() -> cdrom_number_of_slots(), if the
> device is an individual or cartridge changer.

Ohk. Is there an upper limit to cdi->capacity? If not, we are left with
barrier_nospec().

> Therefore, I think using CDI_MAX_CAPACITY of 1 is not the correct
> approach. Jordy's V2 patch is fine therefore, but perhaps using
> array_index_nospec() with cdi->capacity is still better than a
> do/while loop from a performance perspective, given it would be cached
> etc. at that point, so possibly quicker. Thoughts? (I'm no expert on
> spectre-v1 I'll admit).

array_index_nospec() can only clip the arg correctly if the upper bound
is correct. Problem with array_index_nospec(arg, cdi->capacity) is
cdi->capacity is not a constant, so it suffers from the same problem as
arg i.e. cdi->capacity could also be speculated. Although having to
control 2 loads makes the attack difficult, but does not rules out
completely.

barrier_nospec() makes the CPU wait for all previous loads to retire
before executing following instructions speculatively. This causes the
conditional branch to resolve correctly. I hope this does not fall into
a hotpath.