From: "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@zx2c4.com>
To: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@kernel.org>
Cc: x86@kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Adam Langley <agl@google.com>, Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Should Linux set the new constant-time mode CPU flags?
Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2022 15:05:59 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Yw0OF89auWTh12Xd@zx2c4.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Ywzr2d52ixYXUDWR@zx2c4.com>
On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 12:39:53PM -0400, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
> In terms of granularity, I saw other folks suggesting making it per-task
> (so, presumably, a prctl() knob), and others mentioning doing it just
> for kernel crypto. For the latter, I guess the crypto API could set it
> inside of its abstractions, and the various lib/crypto APIs could set it
> at invocation time. I wonder, though, what's the cost of
> enabling/disabling it? Would we in fact need a kind of lazy-deferred
> disabling, like we have with kernel_fpu_end()? I also wonder what
> crypto-adjacent code might wind up being missed if we're going function
> by function. Like, obviously we'd set this for crypto_memneq, but what
> about potential unprotected `==` of ID numbers that could leak some info
> in various protocols? What other subtle nearby code should we be
> thinking about, that relies on constant time logic but isn't neatly
> folded inside a crypto_do_something() function?
Another random note on this: I would hope that setting that MSR
represents a speculation barrier or general instruction stream barrier,
so that you can't do something naughty with the scheduler to toggle it
rapidly and measure crypto timings somehow.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-08-29 19:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-08-25 23:15 Should Linux set the new constant-time mode CPU flags? Eric Biggers
2022-08-26 7:23 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-08-26 8:45 ` Arnd Bergmann
2022-09-15 17:18 ` Catalin Marinas
2022-08-26 15:40 ` Jeffrey Walton
2022-08-29 16:39 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2022-08-29 18:08 ` Eric Biggers
2022-08-29 19:09 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2022-08-29 19:05 ` Jason A. Donenfeld [this message]
2022-08-30 14:25 ` Dave Hansen
2022-09-01 11:00 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-10-25 5:06 ` Eric Biggers
2022-09-15 17:52 ` Catalin Marinas
2022-10-26 17:01 ` Ard Biesheuvel
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=Yw0OF89auWTh12Xd@zx2c4.com \
--to=jason@zx2c4.com \
--cc=agl@google.com \
--cc=ardb@kernel.org \
--cc=ebiggers@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/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