From: Nadav Amit <nadav.amit@gmail.com>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: "Radim Krčmář" <rkrcmar@redhat.com>,
"Nadav Amit" <namit@cs.technion.ac.il>,
kvm@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/5] KVM: x86: Emulator performs code segment checks on read access
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2014 02:15:43 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <543B0B9F.9060708@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <543A7042.2050507@redhat.com>
On 10/12/14 3:12 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 12/10/2014 08:57, Nadav Amit ha scritto:
>> Looks good. I’ll give it a try but it is hard to give a definitive
>> answer, since the emulator is still bug-ridden.
>
> Yes, we need to write unit tests for this, especially the conforming
> case. A bit of a pain to get kvm-unit-tests in ring 3 (access.flat
> does it), but I'll give it a shot.
>
> Paolo
>
I think the problem might be even more fundamental.
According to the SDM, the privilege level checks (CPL/DPL/RPL) are only performed when the segment is loaded; I see no reference to privilege checks when data is accessed.
You should be able to load a segment with DPL=0 while you are in CPL=0, then change CPL to 3 and still access the segment (obviously, it is not the best practice).
In that case, all the privilege checks in __linearize are redundant and for some extent incorrect.
Obviously, I am afraid to submit a patch that removes them, since if the privilege checks of __linearize are needed in certain case, this may introduce security problem.
Do you agree?
Nadav
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-10-12 23:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-10-02 22:10 [PATCH 0/5] KVM: x86: Various bug fixes Nadav Amit
2014-10-02 22:10 ` [PATCH 1/5] KVM: x86: Clear DR7.LE during task-switch Nadav Amit
2014-10-06 19:45 ` Radim Krčmář
2014-10-02 22:10 ` [PATCH 2/5] KVM: x86: Emulator performs code segment checks on read access Nadav Amit
2014-10-06 20:32 ` Radim Krčmář
2014-10-10 2:07 ` [PATCH v2 " Nadav Amit
2014-10-10 15:54 ` Radim Krčmář
2014-10-11 9:39 ` Paolo Bonzini
2014-10-12 6:57 ` Nadav Amit
2014-10-12 12:12 ` Paolo Bonzini
2014-10-12 23:15 ` Nadav Amit [this message]
2014-10-13 4:29 ` Paolo Bonzini
2014-10-13 11:31 ` Gleb Natapov
2014-10-19 16:07 ` Nadav Amit
2014-10-02 22:10 ` [PATCH 3/5] KVM: x86: Decoding guest instructions which cross page boundary may fail Nadav Amit
2014-10-06 20:50 ` Radim Krčmář
2014-10-07 9:15 ` Nadav Amit
2014-10-08 9:02 ` Paolo Bonzini
2014-10-02 22:10 ` [PATCH 4/5] KVM: vmx: Unavailable DR4/5 is checked before CPL Nadav Amit
2014-10-06 19:33 ` Radim Krčmář
2014-10-02 22:10 ` [PATCH 5/5] KVM: x86: Using TSC deadline may cause multiple interrupts by user writes Nadav Amit
2014-10-06 20:57 ` Radim Krčmář
2014-10-07 9:35 ` Nadav Amit
2014-10-08 10:06 ` Radim Krčmář
2014-10-08 10:07 ` Paolo Bonzini
2014-10-10 1:55 ` Nadav Amit
2014-10-10 9:45 ` Paolo Bonzini
2014-10-10 12:50 ` Radim Krčmář
2014-10-10 12:51 ` Nadav Amit
2014-10-10 13:55 ` Paolo Bonzini
2014-10-10 14:02 ` Paolo Bonzini
2014-10-08 9:29 ` Paolo Bonzini
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=543B0B9F.9060708@gmail.com \
--to=nadav.amit@gmail.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=namit@cs.technion.ac.il \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=rkrcmar@redhat.com \
/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).