linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 21/35] x86/bugs: Determine relevant vulnerabilities based on 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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20250211223837.44254vntc5tspirf@jpoimboe>
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2025 14:38:37 -0800
From: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...nel.org>
To: "Kaplan, David" <David.Kaplan@....com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Pawan Gupta <pawan.kumar.gupta@...ux.intel.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
	"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
	"H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 21/35] x86/bugs: Determine relevant vulnerabilities
 based on attack vector controls.

On Tue, Feb 11, 2025 at 08:53:53PM +0000, Kaplan, David wrote:
> If I understand your proposal correctly, 'mitigate_disable_smt' means
> that the kernel may disable SMT if a vulnerability being mitigated
> requires it (yes?).  I wonder if that should be 'mitigate_smt' with a
> 3-way selection of:
> 
> 'on' (disable SMT if needed based on vulnerabilities)
> 'auto' (do not disable SMT but apply other existing SMT-based mitigations on relevant vulnerabilities)
> 'off' (do not apply any SMT related mitigations like STIBP)
> 
> And this would not be used when selecting whether to mitigate a bug, only in which mitigations are applied.
> 
> Thoughts?

Sounds good!

-- 
Josh