public inbox for linux-arch@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org
Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org,
	linux-arch@vger.kernel.org,
	Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	alan@linux.intel.com, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
	torvalds@linux-foundation.org, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
	Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
	kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
Subject: [PATCH 3.16 51/76] Documentation: Document array_index_nospec
Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2018 03:06:12 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <lsq.1520823972.116714198@decadent.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <lsq.1520823971.5976735@decadent.org.uk>

3.16.56-rc1 review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let me know.

------------------

From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>

commit f84a56f73dddaeac1dba8045b007f742f61cd2da upstream.

Document the rationale and usage of the new array_index_nospec() helper.

Signed-off-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
Signed-off-by: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
Signed-off-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Reviewed-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Cc: linux-arch@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org
Cc: kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com
Cc: torvalds@linux-foundation.org
Cc: alan@linux.intel.com
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/151727413645.33451.15878817161436755393.stgit@dwillia2-desk3.amr.corp.intel.com
Signed-off-by: Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk>
---
 Documentation/speculation.txt | 90 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 90 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 Documentation/speculation.txt

--- /dev/null
+++ b/Documentation/speculation.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,90 @@
+This document explains potential effects of speculation, and how undesirable
+effects can be mitigated portably using common APIs.
+
+===========
+Speculation
+===========
+
+To improve performance and minimize average latencies, many contemporary CPUs
+employ speculative execution techniques such as branch prediction, performing
+work which may be discarded at a later stage.
+
+Typically speculative execution cannot be observed from architectural state,
+such as the contents of registers. However, in some cases it is possible to
+observe its impact on microarchitectural state, such as the presence or
+absence of data in caches. Such state may form side-channels which can be
+observed to extract secret information.
+
+For example, in the presence of branch prediction, it is possible for bounds
+checks to be ignored by code which is speculatively executed. Consider the
+following code:
+
+	int load_array(int *array, unsigned int index)
+	{
+		if (index >= MAX_ARRAY_ELEMS)
+			return 0;
+		else
+			return array[index];
+	}
+
+Which, on arm64, may be compiled to an assembly sequence such as:
+
+	CMP	<index>, #MAX_ARRAY_ELEMS
+	B.LT	less
+	MOV	<returnval>, #0
+	RET
+  less:
+	LDR	<returnval>, [<array>, <index>]
+	RET
+
+It is possible that a CPU mis-predicts the conditional branch, and
+speculatively loads array[index], even if index >= MAX_ARRAY_ELEMS. This
+value will subsequently be discarded, but the speculated load may affect
+microarchitectural state which can be subsequently measured.
+
+More complex sequences involving multiple dependent memory accesses may
+result in sensitive information being leaked. Consider the following
+code, building on the prior example:
+
+	int load_dependent_arrays(int *arr1, int *arr2, int index)
+	{
+		int val1, val2,
+
+		val1 = load_array(arr1, index);
+		val2 = load_array(arr2, val1);
+
+		return val2;
+	}
+
+Under speculation, the first call to load_array() may return the value
+of an out-of-bounds address, while the second call will influence
+microarchitectural state dependent on this value. This may provide an
+arbitrary read primitive.
+
+====================================
+Mitigating speculation side-channels
+====================================
+
+The kernel provides a generic API to ensure that bounds checks are
+respected even under speculation. Architectures which are affected by
+speculation-based side-channels are expected to implement these
+primitives.
+
+The array_index_nospec() helper in <linux/nospec.h> can be used to
+prevent information from being leaked via side-channels.
+
+A call to array_index_nospec(index, size) returns a sanitized index
+value that is bounded to [0, size) even under cpu speculation
+conditions.
+
+This can be used to protect the earlier load_array() example:
+
+	int load_array(int *array, unsigned int index)
+	{
+		if (index >= MAX_ARRAY_ELEMS)
+			return 0;
+		else {
+			index = array_index_nospec(index, MAX_ARRAY_ELEMS);
+			return array[index];
+		}
+	}

  parent reply	other threads:[~2018-03-12  3:06 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <lsq.1520823971.5976735@decadent.org.uk>
2018-03-12  3:06 ` [PATCH 3.16 53/76] x86: Implement array_index_mask_nospec Ben Hutchings
2018-03-12  3:06   ` Ben Hutchings
2018-03-12  3:06 ` [PATCH 3.16 58/76] nl80211: Sanitize array index in parse_txq_params Ben Hutchings
2018-03-12  3:06   ` Ben Hutchings
2018-03-12  3:06 ` [PATCH 3.16 52/76] array_index_nospec: Sanitize speculative array de-references Ben Hutchings
2018-03-12  3:06   ` Ben Hutchings
2018-03-12  3:06 ` [PATCH 3.16 55/76] x86/get_user: Use pointer masking to limit speculation Ben Hutchings
2018-03-12  3:06   ` Ben Hutchings
2018-03-12  3:06 ` [PATCH 3.16 69/76] nospec: Kill array_index_nospec_mask_check() Ben Hutchings
2018-03-12  3:06   ` Ben Hutchings
2018-03-12  3:06 ` [PATCH 3.16 57/76] vfs, fdtable: Prevent bounds-check bypass via speculative execution Ben Hutchings
2018-03-12  3:06   ` Ben Hutchings
2018-03-12  3:06 ` [PATCH 3.16 73/76] x86: Introduce __uaccess_begin_nospec() and uaccess_try_nospec Ben Hutchings
2018-03-12  3:06   ` Ben Hutchings
2018-03-12  3:06 ` [PATCH 3.16 56/76] x86/syscall: Sanitize syscall table de-references under speculation Ben Hutchings
2018-03-12  3:06   ` Ben Hutchings
2018-03-12  7:32   ` Jiri Slaby
2018-03-12  7:32     ` Jiri Slaby
2018-03-19  0:59     ` Ben Hutchings
2018-03-19  0:59       ` Ben Hutchings
2018-03-12  3:06 ` Ben Hutchings [this message]
2018-03-12  3:06   ` [PATCH 3.16 51/76] Documentation: Document array_index_nospec Ben Hutchings
2018-03-12  3:06 ` [PATCH 3.16 74/76] x86/usercopy: Replace open coded stac/clac with __uaccess_{begin, end} Ben Hutchings
2018-03-12  3:06   ` Ben Hutchings
2018-03-12  3:06 ` [PATCH 3.16 54/76] x86: Introduce barrier_nospec Ben Hutchings
2018-03-12  3:06   ` Ben Hutchings
2018-03-12  3:06 ` [PATCH 3.16 59/76] x86/spectre: Report get_user mitigation for spectre_v1 Ben Hutchings
2018-03-12  3:06   ` Ben Hutchings
2018-03-12  3:06 ` [PATCH 3.16 70/76] nospec: Include <asm/barrier.h> dependency Ben Hutchings
2018-03-12  3:06   ` Ben Hutchings
2018-03-12  3:06 ` [PATCH 3.16 75/76] x86/uaccess: Use __uaccess_begin_nospec() and uaccess_try_nospec Ben Hutchings
2018-03-12  3:06   ` Ben Hutchings

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=lsq.1520823972.116714198@decadent.org.uk \
    --to=ben@decadent.org.uk \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=alan@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=corbet@lwn.net \
    --cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=keescook@chromium.org \
    --cc=kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com \
    --cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=will.deacon@arm.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