From: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>
To: Dominik Brodowski <linux@dominikbrodowski.net>,
mingo@kernel.org, hpa@zytor.com, tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, tglx@linutronix.de
Cc: jpoimboe@redhat.com, "Wieczorkiewicz, Pawel" <wipawel@amazon.de>
Subject: Re: [tip:x86/pti] x86/speculation: Use Indirect Branch Prediction Barrier in context switch
Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2018 08:31:53 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1517473913.18619.281.camel@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180131070300.GA28206@light.dominikbrodowski.net>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1103 bytes --]
On Wed, 2018-01-31 at 08:03 +0100, Dominik Brodowski wrote:
> Whether a process needs protection by IBPB on context switches is a
> different question to whether a process should be allowed to be dumped,
> though the former may be a superset of the latter. Enable IBPB on all
> context switches to a different userspace process, until we have a clear
> mitigation strategy for userspace against Spectre-v2 designed and
> implemented.
>
> ...
> if (tsk && tsk->mm &&
> - tsk->mm->context.ctx_id != last_ctx_id &&
> - get_dumpable(tsk->mm) != SUID_DUMP_USER)
> + tsk->mm->context.ctx_id != last_ctx_id)
> indirect_branch_prediction_barrier();
I understand your argument and I sympathise.
But that's going to hurt a *lot*, and we don't even have a viable
proof-of-concept for a user←→user Spectre v2 attack, do we? It's only
theoretical?
Show a working PoC and it makes the argument somewhat more
convincing...
[-- Attachment #2: smime.p7s --]
[-- Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature, Size: 5213 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-02-01 8:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-01-29 22:04 [PATCH] x86/speculation: Use Indirect Branch Prediction Barrier in context switch David Woodhouse
2018-01-30 17:48 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2018-01-30 21:23 ` Tim Chen
2018-01-30 22:00 ` Borislav Petkov
2018-01-30 22:21 ` Thomas Gleixner
2018-01-30 22:55 ` Borislav Petkov
2018-01-31 3:59 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2018-01-31 23:25 ` Tim Chen
2018-01-30 20:38 ` Borislav Petkov
2018-01-30 21:03 ` Tim Chen
2018-01-30 21:57 ` Borislav Petkov
2018-01-30 22:26 ` Tim Chen
2018-01-30 22:43 ` Borislav Petkov
2018-01-31 0:25 ` Tim Chen
2018-01-31 0:41 ` Borislav Petkov
2018-01-30 22:39 ` [tip:x86/pti] " tip-bot for Tim Chen
2018-01-31 7:03 ` Dominik Brodowski
2018-01-31 13:24 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2018-02-01 8:25 ` Christian Brauner
2018-02-01 8:31 ` David Woodhouse [this message]
2018-02-01 15:40 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2018-02-04 19:39 ` Dominik Brodowski
2018-02-05 14:18 ` David Woodhouse
2018-02-05 19:35 ` Tim Chen
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=1517473913.18619.281.camel@infradead.org \
--to=dwmw2@infradead.org \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=jpoimboe@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@dominikbrodowski.net \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=wipawel@amazon.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).