linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 00/34] x86/bugs: Attack vector controls

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: <20240917170407.jxtpb75iru3qg74c@desk>
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2024 10:04:07 -0700
From: Pawan Gupta <pawan.kumar.gupta@...ux.intel.com>
To: David Kaplan <david.kaplan@....com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...nel.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, x86@...nel.org,
	"H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 00/34] x86/bugs: Attack vector controls

On Thu, Sep 12, 2024 at 02:08:23PM -0500, David Kaplan wrote:
> The rest of the patches define new "attack vector" command line options
> to make it easier to select appropriate mitigations based on the usage
> of the system.  While many users may not be intimately familiar with the
> details of these CPU vulnerabilities, they are likely better able to
> understand the intended usage of their system.  As a result, unneeded
> mitigations may be disabled, allowing users to recoup more performance.

How much performance improvement are you seeing with each of the attack
vector?

There aren't many vulnerabilities that only affect a single attack vector.
So, selecting to mitigate single attack vector mitigates a lot more than
that.

We may be able to get better performance improvement by adding vector-based
switches at the mitigation points. And only enable them if user asked for it.