From: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Cc: Jiri Kosina <jikos@kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
David Woodhouse <dwmw@amazon.co.uk>,
Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
Casey Schaufler <casey.schaufler@intel.com>,
Asit Mallick <asit.k.mallick@intel.com>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.intel.com>,
Jon Masters <jcm@redhat.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Patch v2 1/4] x86/speculation: Option to select app to app mitigation for spectre_v2
Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2018 09:24:12 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <26675a26-a4b4-a148-2e3a-1c29432119b2@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20181002092328.GA122128@gmail.com>
On 10/02/2018 02:23 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>
>> Subject: x86/speculation: Option to select app to app mitigation for spectre_v2
>>
>
> We prefer to start commit titles with verbs, not nouns, so this should be something like:
>
> x86/speculation: Add option to select app to app mitigation for spectre_v2
>
>> Jiri Kosina's patch makes IBPB and STIBP available for
>> general spectre v2 app to app mitigation. IBPB will be issued for
>> switching to an app that's not ptraceable by the previous
>> app and STIBP will be always turned on.
>>
>> However, app to app exploit is in general difficult
>> due to address space layout randomization in apps and
>> the need to know an app's address space layout ahead of time.
>> Users may not wish to incur app to app performance
>> overhead from IBPB and STIBP for general non security sensitive apps.
>>
>> This patch provides a lite option for spectre_v2 app to app
>> mitigation where IBPB is only issued for security sensitive
>> non-dumpable app.
>>
>> The strict option will keep system at high security level
>> where IBPB and STIBP are used to defend all apps against
>> spectre_v2 app to app attack.
>
> s/system
> /the system
>
> s/attack
> attacks
>
>> + spectre_v2_app2app=
>> + [X86] Control app to app mitigation of Spectre variant 2
>> + (indirect branch speculation) vulnerability.
>> +
>> + lite - only turn on mitigation for non-dumpable processes
>> + strict - protect against attacks for all user processes
>> + auto - let kernel decide lite or strict mode
>
> Perhaps add:
> lite - only turn on mitigation for non-dumpable processes (i.e.
> protect daemons and other privileged processes that tend
> to be non-dumpable)
>
> ?
Will do.
>
>> +
>>
>> +static const char *spectre_v2_app2app_strings[] = {
>> + [SPECTRE_V2_APP2APP_NONE] = "App-App Vulnerable",
>> + [SPECTRE_V2_APP2APP_LITE] = "App-App Mitigation: Protect only non-dumpable process",
>> + [SPECTRE_V2_APP2APP_STRICT] = "App-App Mitigation: Full app to app attack protection",
>> +};
>> +
>> +DEFINE_STATIC_KEY_FALSE(spectre_v2_app_lite);
>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(spectre_v2_app_lite);
>
> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL() I suspect?
This is only used in the core kernel functions related to
context switches. So I don't expect any module functions
needing this value.
>
>> +
>> #undef pr_fmt
>> #define pr_fmt(fmt) "Spectre V2 : " fmt
>>
>> static enum spectre_v2_mitigation spectre_v2_enabled __ro_after_init =
>> SPECTRE_V2_NONE;
>>
>> +static enum spectre_v2_mitigation spectre_v2_app2app_enabled __ro_after_init =
>> + SPECTRE_V2_APP2APP_NONE;
>> +
>> void
>> x86_virt_spec_ctrl(u64 guest_spec_ctrl, u64 guest_virt_spec_ctrl, bool setguest)
>> {
>> @@ -275,6 +293,46 @@ static const struct {
>> { "auto", SPECTRE_V2_CMD_AUTO, false },
>> };
>>
>> +static const struct {
>> + const char *option;
>> + enum spectre_v2_app2app_mitigation_cmd cmd;
>> + bool secure;
>> +} app2app_mitigation_options[] = {
>> + { "lite", SPECTRE_V2_APP2APP_CMD_LITE, false },
>> + { "strict", SPECTRE_V2_APP2APP_CMD_STRICT, false },
>> + { "auto", SPECTRE_V2_APP2APP_CMD_AUTO, false },
>> +};
>
> Am I reading this right that it's not possible to configure this to 'none', i.e. to disable the
> protection altogether?
Sure, I can add a none option. I'll probably put that in patch 4
which is easy to disable the mitigation by not turning on
STIBP flag for the none option.
>
>
>> + * For lite protection mode, we only protect the non-dumpable
>> + * processes.
>> + *
>> + * Otherwise check if the current (previous) task has access to the memory
>> + * of the @tsk (next) task for strict app to app protection.
>> + * If access is denied, make sure to
>> * issue a IBPB to stop user->user Spectre-v2 attacks.
>
> s/a IBPB
> /an IBPB
>
Tim
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-10-02 16:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-09-26 0:43 [Patch v2 0/4] Provide options to enable spectre_v2 userspace-userspace protection Tim Chen
2018-09-26 0:43 ` [Patch v2 1/4] x86/speculation: Option to select app to app mitigation for spectre_v2 Tim Chen
2018-10-02 9:23 ` Ingo Molnar
2018-10-02 16:24 ` Tim Chen [this message]
2018-10-02 20:04 ` Thomas Gleixner
2018-09-26 0:43 ` [Patch v2 2/4] x86/speculation: Provide application property based STIBP protection Tim Chen
2018-10-02 19:10 ` Thomas Gleixner
2018-10-04 19:19 ` Tim Chen
2018-09-26 0:43 ` [Patch v2 3/4] x86/speculation: Extend per process STIBP to AMD cpus Tim Chen
2018-09-26 17:24 ` Tim Chen
2018-09-26 19:11 ` Lendacky, Thomas
2018-10-02 9:27 ` Ingo Molnar
2018-10-02 19:02 ` Thomas Gleixner
2018-09-26 0:43 ` [Patch v2 4/4] x86/speculation: Add prctl to control indirect branch speculation per process Tim Chen
2018-10-02 9:35 ` Ingo Molnar
2018-10-02 16:12 ` Tim Chen
2018-10-03 7:25 ` Ingo Molnar
2018-10-02 17:58 ` Thomas Gleixner
2018-10-05 18:12 ` Tim Chen
2018-10-05 18:46 ` Thomas Gleixner
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=26675a26-a4b4-a148-2e3a-1c29432119b2@linux.intel.com \
--to=tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=aarcange@redhat.com \
--cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
--cc=arjan@linux.intel.com \
--cc=asit.k.mallick@intel.com \
--cc=casey.schaufler@intel.com \
--cc=dave.hansen@intel.com \
--cc=dwmw@amazon.co.uk \
--cc=jcm@redhat.com \
--cc=jikos@kernel.org \
--cc=jpoimboe@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=thomas.lendacky@amd.com \
--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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®