historical-speck.lore.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: speck@linutronix.de
Subject: [MODERATED] Re: LVI
Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2019 19:12:57 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191119181257.GA2283647@kroah.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191119174008.7dbymix2eo4mrv57@treble>

On Tue, Nov 19, 2019 at 11:40:08AM -0600, speck for Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> What kernel changes (if any) are needed for LVI?  I haven't seen any
> discussion here.
> 
> The last I heard, the official CRD was Dec 10, but was likely to move to
> March.
> 
> For the uninitiated, LVI is a reverse MDS/L1TF:
> 
> 1) Victim puts secret data in CPU buffer or L1.  Alternatively,
>    attacker puts address of secret data in CPU buffer or L1.
> 
> 2) Attacker gets victim to fault or assist on a load.  (Note that an
>    assist gives a much bigger speculation window - it can be triggered
>    if a page Accessed bit needs updating)
> 
> 3) While waiting for the fault/assist to complete, victim speculatively
>    reads CPU buffer or L1 to get data (or address) from step 1.
> 
> 4) Victim gadgets expose the data via the usual L1 side channel.
> 
> 
> To protect the kernel, we'd presumably need to look for places where
> users can trigger a faulting/assisting load.  For example,
> copy_from_user().
> 
> copy_from_user() has an LFENCE between the access_ok() check and the
> actual copy to protect against Spectre v1.  What if we move that LFENCE
> to *after* the copy?  I think that would protect against both Spectre v1
> and LVI.
> 
> Thoughts?
> 
> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/uaccess.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/uaccess.h
> index 61d93f062a36..457207aece71 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/uaccess.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/uaccess.h
> @@ -119,9 +119,9 @@ extern int __get_user_bad(void);
>  
>  #define __uaccess_begin() stac()
>  #define __uaccess_end()   clac()
> -#define __uaccess_begin_nospec()	\
> +#define __uaccess_end_nospec()	\
>  ({					\
> -	stac();				\
> +	clac();				\
>  	barrier_nospec();		\
>  })

Um, don't we _really_ want stac() here?  That's the only thing that is
saving our butts in a number of places.  Why get rid of it?  Otherwise
it should be easy to cause a speculatave load by userspace for any
address they feel like.

Or am I mistaken about what you are trying to solve here?

thanks,

greg k-h

  parent reply	other threads:[~2019-11-19 18:13 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-11-19 17:40 [MODERATED] LVI Josh Poimboeuf
2019-11-19 17:51 ` [MODERATED] LVI Andrew Cooper
2019-11-19 18:27   ` Josh Poimboeuf
2019-11-19 19:26     ` Andrew Cooper
2019-11-20  9:52     ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-11-19 18:12 ` Greg KH [this message]
2019-11-19 18:21   ` Josh Poimboeuf
2019-11-19 18:46     ` Greg KH
2019-11-19 18:21   ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-11-19 18:22 ` Andrew Cooper
2019-11-19 18:27   ` Josh Poimboeuf
2019-11-19 18:36     ` Luck, Tony
2019-11-20 17:02       ` Greg KH
2019-11-19 18:39     ` Andrew Cooper
2019-11-19 21:00       ` Josh Poimboeuf
2019-11-19 21:03         ` Josh Poimboeuf
2019-11-20 14:11           ` Andrew Cooper
2019-11-20  8:04 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-11-20  9:49   ` Andrew Cooper
2019-11-20 17:13 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2019-11-20 17:25   ` Greg KH
2019-11-20 17:29     ` Tyler Hicks
2019-11-20 17:30     ` Andrew Cooper
2019-11-20 17:46       ` Greg KH
2019-11-20 19:09     ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-11-20 19:19       ` Greg KH
2019-11-21  0:50         ` LVI Thomas Gleixner
2019-11-21 13:45           ` [MODERATED] LVI Greg KH
2019-11-26  0:54 ` Andi Kleen
2019-11-26 10:37   ` Greg KH
2019-11-26 18:23     ` Andi Kleen
2019-11-27  7:38       ` Greg KH
2019-11-26 10:55   ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-11-26 18:28     ` Andi Kleen

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20191119181257.GA2283647@kroah.com \
    --to=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=speck@linutronix.de \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).