linux-kernel - Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH] e1000e: disregard NVM checksum on tgp when valid checksum mask is not set

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: <1e92a26e-1fb9-44bb-86df-8007cf9ee711@intel.com>
Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2025 12:22:23 +0300
From: "Lifshits, Vitaly" <vitaly.lifshits@...el.com>
To: Vlad URSU <vlad@...u.me>, Jacek Kowalski <jacek@...ekk.info>, Tony Nguyen
	<anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com>, Przemek Kitszel <przemyslaw.kitszel@...el.com>,
	Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@...n.ch>, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, "Paolo
 Abeni" <pabeni@...hat.com>
CC: <intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH] e1000e: disregard NVM checksum on tgp
 when valid checksum mask is not set



On 6/2/2025 9:44 PM, Vlad URSU wrote:
> On 01.06.2025 13:19, Lifshits, Vitaly wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 5/15/2025 10:07 PM, Vlad URSU wrote:
>>> On 15.05.2025 07:39, Lifshits, Vitaly wrote:
>>>> Since the checksum word is 0xFFFF which is peculiar, can you dump 
>>>> the whole NVM and share with us?
>>>
>>> Sure, here's a dump of my NVM
>>>
>>> Offset        Values
>>> ------        ------
>>> 0x0000:        d0 8e 79 07 78 c8 01 08 ff ff 44 00 01 00 6c 00
>>> 0x0010:        ff ff ff ff c9 10 54 0a 28 10 f9 15 00 00 00 00
>>> 0x0020:        00 00 00 00 00 80 05 a7 30 30 00 16 00 00 00 0c
>>> 0x0030:        f3 08 00 0a 43 08 13 01 f9 15 ad ba f9 15 fa 15
>>> 0x0040:        ad ba f9 15 ad ba f9 15 00 00 80 80 00 4e 86 08
>>
>> You're right — I see that the SW compatibility bit is set and the 
>> checksum appears to be incorrect.
>>
>> Since the NVM is part of the system firmware and typically managed by 
>> the system manufacturer, I recommend checking whether a firmware 
>> update is available for your system as a first step.
>>
>> If no update is available, perhaps we can consider ignoring the 
>> checksum on TGP systems if one of the following conditions is met:
>> 1. SW compatibility bit is not set (current Jacek's approach)
>> 2. The checksum word at offset 0x3F retains its factory default value 
>> of 0xFFFF.
> 
> I am already on the latest firmware. I have also tried downgrading to 
> earlier versions and they have the same problem.

Ok, so in this case I think that we should go with option 2.

Jacek - can you please add this check to your patch?