linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86/bugs: Add missing NO

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]

Message-ID: <9e510f2e-4b11-4001-b6c0-7a3766b8abb4@intel.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2024 16:36:00 -0700
From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
To: Daniel Sneddon <daniel.sneddon@...ux.intel.com>,
 Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
 Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
 "maintainer:X86 ARCHITECTURE (32-BIT AND 64-BIT)" <x86@...nel.org>
Cc: pawan.kumar.gupta@...ux.intel.com, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
 "open list:X86 ARCHITECTURE (32-BIT AND 64-BIT)"
 <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/bugs: Add missing NO_SSB flag

On 8/28/24 15:40, Daniel Sneddon wrote:
> The Moorefield and Lightning Mountain Atom processors are
> missing the NO_SSB flag in the vulnerabilities whitelist.
> This will cause unaffected parts to incorrectly be reported
> as vulnerable. Add the missing flag.

It'd be really cool to add two things to these changelogs: First, who
figured this out and how?  Basically, who cares and why?  Second, what
public Intel documentation supports this change?