linux/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/bugs.c

708 lines
20 KiB
C
Raw Normal View History

License cleanup: add SPDX GPL-2.0 license identifier to files with no license Many source files in the tree are missing licensing information, which makes it harder for compliance tools to determine the correct license. By default all files without license information are under the default license of the kernel, which is GPL version 2. Update the files which contain no license information with the 'GPL-2.0' SPDX license identifier. The SPDX identifier is a legally binding shorthand, which can be used instead of the full boiler plate text. This patch is based on work done by Thomas Gleixner and Kate Stewart and Philippe Ombredanne. How this work was done: Patches were generated and checked against linux-4.14-rc6 for a subset of the use cases: - file had no licensing information it it. - file was a */uapi/* one with no licensing information in it, - file was a */uapi/* one with existing licensing information, Further patches will be generated in subsequent months to fix up cases where non-standard license headers were used, and references to license had to be inferred by heuristics based on keywords. The analysis to determine which SPDX License Identifier to be applied to a file was done in a spreadsheet of side by side results from of the output of two independent scanners (ScanCode & Windriver) producing SPDX tag:value files created by Philippe Ombredanne. Philippe prepared the base worksheet, and did an initial spot review of a few 1000 files. The 4.13 kernel was the starting point of the analysis with 60,537 files assessed. Kate Stewart did a file by file comparison of the scanner results in the spreadsheet to determine which SPDX license identifier(s) to be applied to the file. She confirmed any determination that was not immediately clear with lawyers working with the Linux Foundation. Criteria used to select files for SPDX license identifier tagging was: - Files considered eligible had to be source code files. - Make and config files were included as candidates if they contained >5 lines of source - File already had some variant of a license header in it (even if <5 lines). All documentation files were explicitly excluded. The following heuristics were used to determine which SPDX license identifiers to apply. - when both scanners couldn't find any license traces, file was considered to have no license information in it, and the top level COPYING file license applied. For non */uapi/* files that summary was: SPDX license identifier # files ---------------------------------------------------|------- GPL-2.0 11139 and resulted in the first patch in this series. If that file was a */uapi/* path one, it was "GPL-2.0 WITH Linux-syscall-note" otherwise it was "GPL-2.0". Results of that was: SPDX license identifier # files ---------------------------------------------------|------- GPL-2.0 WITH Linux-syscall-note 930 and resulted in the second patch in this series. - if a file had some form of licensing information in it, and was one of the */uapi/* ones, it was denoted with the Linux-syscall-note if any GPL family license was found in the file or had no licensing in it (per prior point). Results summary: SPDX license identifier # files ---------------------------------------------------|------ GPL-2.0 WITH Linux-syscall-note 270 GPL-2.0+ WITH Linux-syscall-note 169 ((GPL-2.0 WITH Linux-syscall-note) OR BSD-2-Clause) 21 ((GPL-2.0 WITH Linux-syscall-note) OR BSD-3-Clause) 17 LGPL-2.1+ WITH Linux-syscall-note 15 GPL-1.0+ WITH Linux-syscall-note 14 ((GPL-2.0+ WITH Linux-syscall-note) OR BSD-3-Clause) 5 LGPL-2.0+ WITH Linux-syscall-note 4 LGPL-2.1 WITH Linux-syscall-note 3 ((GPL-2.0 WITH Linux-syscall-note) OR MIT) 3 ((GPL-2.0 WITH Linux-syscall-note) AND MIT) 1 and that resulted in the third patch in this series. - when the two scanners agreed on the detected license(s), that became the concluded license(s). - when there was disagreement between the two scanners (one detected a license but the other didn't, or they both detected different licenses) a manual inspection of the file occurred. - In most cases a manual inspection of the information in the file resulted in a clear resolution of the license that should apply (and which scanner probably needed to revisit its heuristics). - When it was not immediately clear, the license identifier was confirmed with lawyers working with the Linux Foundation. - If there was any question as to the appropriate license identifier, the file was flagged for further research and to be revisited later in time. In total, over 70 hours of logged manual review was done on the spreadsheet to determine the SPDX license identifiers to apply to the source files by Kate, Philippe, Thomas and, in some cases, confirmation by lawyers working with the Linux Foundation. Kate also obtained a third independent scan of the 4.13 code base from FOSSology, and compared selected files where the other two scanners disagreed against that SPDX file, to see if there was new insights. The Windriver scanner is based on an older version of FOSSology in part, so they are related. Thomas did random spot checks in about 500 files from the spreadsheets for the uapi headers and agreed with SPDX license identifier in the files he inspected. For the non-uapi files Thomas did random spot checks in about 15000 files. In initial set of patches against 4.14-rc6, 3 files were found to have copy/paste license identifier errors, and have been fixed to reflect the correct identifier. Additionally Philippe spent 10 hours this week doing a detailed manual inspection and review of the 12,461 patched files from the initial patch version early this week with: - a full scancode scan run, collecting the matched texts, detected license ids and scores - reviewing anything where there was a license detected (about 500+ files) to ensure that the applied SPDX license was correct - reviewing anything where there was no detection but the patch license was not GPL-2.0 WITH Linux-syscall-note to ensure that the applied SPDX license was correct This produced a worksheet with 20 files needing minor correction. This worksheet was then exported into 3 different .csv files for the different types of files to be modified. These .csv files were then reviewed by Greg. Thomas wrote a script to parse the csv files and add the proper SPDX tag to the file, in the format that the file expected. This script was further refined by Greg based on the output to detect more types of files automatically and to distinguish between header and source .c files (which need different comment types.) Finally Greg ran the script using the .csv files to generate the patches. Reviewed-by: Kate Stewart <kstewart@linuxfoundation.org> Reviewed-by: Philippe Ombredanne <pombredanne@nexb.com> Reviewed-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2017-11-01 14:07:57 +00:00
// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
/*
* Copyright (C) 1994 Linus Torvalds
*
* Cyrix stuff, June 1998 by:
* - Rafael R. Reilova (moved everything from head.S),
* <rreilova@ececs.uc.edu>
* - Channing Corn (tests & fixes),
* - Andrew D. Balsa (code cleanup).
*/
#include <linux/init.h>
#include <linux/utsname.h>
#include <linux/cpu.h>
#include <linux/module.h>
x86/speculation: Add prctl for Speculative Store Bypass mitigation Add prctl based control for Speculative Store Bypass mitigation and make it the default mitigation for Intel and AMD. Andi Kleen provided the following rationale (slightly redacted): There are multiple levels of impact of Speculative Store Bypass: 1) JITed sandbox. It cannot invoke system calls, but can do PRIME+PROBE and may have call interfaces to other code 2) Native code process. No protection inside the process at this level. 3) Kernel. 4) Between processes. The prctl tries to protect against case (1) doing attacks. If the untrusted code can do random system calls then control is already lost in a much worse way. So there needs to be system call protection in some way (using a JIT not allowing them or seccomp). Or rather if the process can subvert its environment somehow to do the prctl it can already execute arbitrary code, which is much worse than SSB. To put it differently, the point of the prctl is to not allow JITed code to read data it shouldn't read from its JITed sandbox. If it already has escaped its sandbox then it can already read everything it wants in its address space, and do much worse. The ability to control Speculative Store Bypass allows to enable the protection selectively without affecting overall system performance. Based on an initial patch from Tim Chen. Completely rewritten. Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Reviewed-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>
2018-04-29 13:26:40 +00:00
#include <linux/nospec.h>
#include <linux/prctl.h>
#include <asm/spec-ctrl.h>
#include <asm/cmdline.h>
#include <asm/bugs.h>
#include <asm/processor.h>
#include <asm/processor-flags.h>
#include <asm/fpu/internal.h>
#include <asm/msr.h>
#include <asm/paravirt.h>
#include <asm/alternative.h>
#include <asm/pgtable.h>
#include <asm/set_memory.h>
x86/retpoline: Fill RSB on context switch for affected CPUs On context switch from a shallow call stack to a deeper one, as the CPU does 'ret' up the deeper side it may encounter RSB entries (predictions for where the 'ret' goes to) which were populated in userspace. This is problematic if neither SMEP nor KPTI (the latter of which marks userspace pages as NX for the kernel) are active, as malicious code in userspace may then be executed speculatively. Overwrite the CPU's return prediction stack with calls which are predicted to return to an infinite loop, to "capture" speculation if this happens. This is required both for retpoline, and also in conjunction with IBRS for !SMEP && !KPTI. On Skylake+ the problem is slightly different, and an *underflow* of the RSB may cause errant branch predictions to occur. So there it's not so much overwrite, as *filling* the RSB to attempt to prevent it getting empty. This is only a partial solution for Skylake+ since there are many other conditions which may result in the RSB becoming empty. The full solution on Skylake+ is to use IBRS, which will prevent the problem even when the RSB becomes empty. With IBRS, the RSB-stuffing will not be required on context switch. [ tglx: Added missing vendor check and slighty massaged comments and changelog ] Signed-off-by: David Woodhouse <dwmw@amazon.co.uk> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Acked-by: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.intel.com> Cc: gnomes@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk Cc: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com> Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com> Cc: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com> Cc: thomas.lendacky@amd.com Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Jiri Kosina <jikos@kernel.org> Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net> Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com> Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@google.com> Cc: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com> Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Paul Turner <pjt@google.com> Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/1515779365-9032-1-git-send-email-dwmw@amazon.co.uk
2018-01-12 17:49:25 +00:00
#include <asm/intel-family.h>
static void __init spectre_v2_select_mitigation(void);
x86/bugs: Provide boot parameters for the spec_store_bypass_disable mitigation Contemporary high performance processors use a common industry-wide optimization known as "Speculative Store Bypass" in which loads from addresses to which a recent store has occurred may (speculatively) see an older value. Intel refers to this feature as "Memory Disambiguation" which is part of their "Smart Memory Access" capability. Memory Disambiguation can expose a cache side-channel attack against such speculatively read values. An attacker can create exploit code that allows them to read memory outside of a sandbox environment (for example, malicious JavaScript in a web page), or to perform more complex attacks against code running within the same privilege level, e.g. via the stack. As a first step to mitigate against such attacks, provide two boot command line control knobs: nospec_store_bypass_disable spec_store_bypass_disable=[off,auto,on] By default affected x86 processors will power on with Speculative Store Bypass enabled. Hence the provided kernel parameters are written from the point of view of whether to enable a mitigation or not. The parameters are as follows: - auto - Kernel detects whether your CPU model contains an implementation of Speculative Store Bypass and picks the most appropriate mitigation. - on - disable Speculative Store Bypass - off - enable Speculative Store Bypass [ tglx: Reordered the checks so that the whole evaluation is not done when the CPU does not support RDS ] Signed-off-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Reviewed-by: Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de> Reviewed-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
2018-04-26 02:04:21 +00:00
static void __init ssb_select_mitigation(void);
/*
* Our boot-time value of the SPEC_CTRL MSR. We read it once so that any
* writes to SPEC_CTRL contain whatever reserved bits have been set.
*/
u64 __ro_after_init x86_spec_ctrl_base;
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(x86_spec_ctrl_base);
/*
* The vendor and possibly platform specific bits which can be modified in
* x86_spec_ctrl_base.
*/
static u64 __ro_after_init x86_spec_ctrl_mask = SPEC_CTRL_IBRS;
/*
* AMD specific MSR info for Speculative Store Bypass control.
* x86_amd_ls_cfg_ssbd_mask is initialized in identify_boot_cpu().
*/
u64 __ro_after_init x86_amd_ls_cfg_base;
u64 __ro_after_init x86_amd_ls_cfg_ssbd_mask;
void __init check_bugs(void)
{
identify_boot_cpu();
if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SMP)) {
pr_info("CPU: ");
print_cpu_info(&boot_cpu_data);
}
/*
* Read the SPEC_CTRL MSR to account for reserved bits which may
* have unknown values. AMD64_LS_CFG MSR is cached in the early AMD
* init code as it is not enumerated and depends on the family.
*/
if (boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_MSR_SPEC_CTRL))
rdmsrl(MSR_IA32_SPEC_CTRL, x86_spec_ctrl_base);
/* Allow STIBP in MSR_SPEC_CTRL if supported */
if (boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_STIBP))
x86_spec_ctrl_mask |= SPEC_CTRL_STIBP;
/* Select the proper spectre mitigation before patching alternatives */
spectre_v2_select_mitigation();
x86/bugs: Provide boot parameters for the spec_store_bypass_disable mitigation Contemporary high performance processors use a common industry-wide optimization known as "Speculative Store Bypass" in which loads from addresses to which a recent store has occurred may (speculatively) see an older value. Intel refers to this feature as "Memory Disambiguation" which is part of their "Smart Memory Access" capability. Memory Disambiguation can expose a cache side-channel attack against such speculatively read values. An attacker can create exploit code that allows them to read memory outside of a sandbox environment (for example, malicious JavaScript in a web page), or to perform more complex attacks against code running within the same privilege level, e.g. via the stack. As a first step to mitigate against such attacks, provide two boot command line control knobs: nospec_store_bypass_disable spec_store_bypass_disable=[off,auto,on] By default affected x86 processors will power on with Speculative Store Bypass enabled. Hence the provided kernel parameters are written from the point of view of whether to enable a mitigation or not. The parameters are as follows: - auto - Kernel detects whether your CPU model contains an implementation of Speculative Store Bypass and picks the most appropriate mitigation. - on - disable Speculative Store Bypass - off - enable Speculative Store Bypass [ tglx: Reordered the checks so that the whole evaluation is not done when the CPU does not support RDS ] Signed-off-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Reviewed-by: Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de> Reviewed-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
2018-04-26 02:04:21 +00:00
/*
* Select proper mitigation for any exposure to the Speculative Store
* Bypass vulnerability.
*/
ssb_select_mitigation();
#ifdef CONFIG_X86_32
/*
* Check whether we are able to run this kernel safely on SMP.
*
* - i386 is no longer supported.
* - In order to run on anything without a TSC, we need to be
* compiled for a i486.
*/
if (boot_cpu_data.x86 < 4)
panic("Kernel requires i486+ for 'invlpg' and other features");
init_utsname()->machine[1] =
'0' + (boot_cpu_data.x86 > 6 ? 6 : boot_cpu_data.x86);
alternative_instructions();
x86, fpu: use non-lazy fpu restore for processors supporting xsave Fundamental model of the current Linux kernel is to lazily init and restore FPU instead of restoring the task state during context switch. This changes that fundamental lazy model to the non-lazy model for the processors supporting xsave feature. Reasons driving this model change are: i. Newer processors support optimized state save/restore using xsaveopt and xrstor by tracking the INIT state and MODIFIED state during context-switch. This is faster than modifying the cr0.TS bit which has serializing semantics. ii. Newer glibc versions use SSE for some of the optimized copy/clear routines. With certain workloads (like boot, kernel-compilation etc), application completes its work with in the first 5 task switches, thus taking upto 5 #DNA traps with the kernel not getting a chance to apply the above mentioned pre-load heuristic. iii. Some xstate features (like AMD's LWP feature) don't honor the cr0.TS bit and thus will not work correctly in the presence of lazy restore. Non-lazy state restore is needed for enabling such features. Some data on a two socket SNB system: * Saved 20K DNA exceptions during boot on a two socket SNB system. * Saved 50K DNA exceptions during kernel-compilation workload. * Improved throughput of the AVX based checksumming function inside the kernel by ~15% as xsave/xrstor is faster than the serializing clts/stts pair. Also now kernel_fpu_begin/end() relies on the patched alternative instructions. So move check_fpu() which uses the kernel_fpu_begin/end() after alternative_instructions(). Signed-off-by: Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@intel.com> Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1345842782-24175-7-git-send-email-suresh.b.siddha@intel.com Merge 32-bit boot fix from, Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1347300665-6209-4-git-send-email-suresh.b.siddha@intel.com Cc: Jim Kukunas <james.t.kukunas@linux.intel.com> Cc: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de> Cc: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com> Signed-off-by: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@linux.intel.com>
2012-08-24 21:13:02 +00:00
fpu__init_check_bugs();
#else /* CONFIG_X86_64 */
alternative_instructions();
/*
* Make sure the first 2MB area is not mapped by huge pages
* There are typically fixed size MTRRs in there and overlapping
* MTRRs into large pages causes slow downs.
*
* Right now we don't do that with gbpages because there seems
* very little benefit for that case.
*/
if (!direct_gbpages)
set_memory_4k((unsigned long)__va(0), 1);
#endif
}
/* The kernel command line selection */
enum spectre_v2_mitigation_cmd {
SPECTRE_V2_CMD_NONE,
SPECTRE_V2_CMD_AUTO,
SPECTRE_V2_CMD_FORCE,
SPECTRE_V2_CMD_RETPOLINE,
SPECTRE_V2_CMD_RETPOLINE_GENERIC,
SPECTRE_V2_CMD_RETPOLINE_AMD,
};
static const char *spectre_v2_strings[] = {
[SPECTRE_V2_NONE] = "Vulnerable",
[SPECTRE_V2_RETPOLINE_MINIMAL] = "Vulnerable: Minimal generic ASM retpoline",
[SPECTRE_V2_RETPOLINE_MINIMAL_AMD] = "Vulnerable: Minimal AMD ASM retpoline",
[SPECTRE_V2_RETPOLINE_GENERIC] = "Mitigation: Full generic retpoline",
[SPECTRE_V2_RETPOLINE_AMD] = "Mitigation: Full AMD retpoline",
};
#undef pr_fmt
#define pr_fmt(fmt) "Spectre V2 : " fmt
static enum spectre_v2_mitigation spectre_v2_enabled __ro_after_init =
SPECTRE_V2_NONE;
void
x86_virt_spec_ctrl(u64 guest_spec_ctrl, u64 guest_virt_spec_ctrl, bool setguest)
{
u64 msrval, guestval, hostval = x86_spec_ctrl_base;
struct thread_info *ti = current_thread_info();
/* Is MSR_SPEC_CTRL implemented ? */
if (static_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_MSR_SPEC_CTRL)) {
/*
* Restrict guest_spec_ctrl to supported values. Clear the
* modifiable bits in the host base value and or the
* modifiable bits from the guest value.
*/
guestval = hostval & ~x86_spec_ctrl_mask;
guestval |= guest_spec_ctrl & x86_spec_ctrl_mask;
/* SSBD controlled in MSR_SPEC_CTRL */
if (static_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_SPEC_CTRL_SSBD))
hostval |= ssbd_tif_to_spec_ctrl(ti->flags);
if (hostval != guestval) {
msrval = setguest ? guestval : hostval;
wrmsrl(MSR_IA32_SPEC_CTRL, msrval);
}
}
/*
* If SSBD is not handled in MSR_SPEC_CTRL on AMD, update
* MSR_AMD64_L2_CFG or MSR_VIRT_SPEC_CTRL if supported.
*/
if (!static_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_LS_CFG_SSBD) &&
!static_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_VIRT_SSBD))
return;
/*
* If the host has SSBD mitigation enabled, force it in the host's
* virtual MSR value. If its not permanently enabled, evaluate
* current's TIF_SSBD thread flag.
*/
if (static_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_SPEC_STORE_BYPASS_DISABLE))
hostval = SPEC_CTRL_SSBD;
else
hostval = ssbd_tif_to_spec_ctrl(ti->flags);
/* Sanitize the guest value */
guestval = guest_virt_spec_ctrl & SPEC_CTRL_SSBD;
if (hostval != guestval) {
unsigned long tif;
tif = setguest ? ssbd_spec_ctrl_to_tif(guestval) :
ssbd_spec_ctrl_to_tif(hostval);
speculative_store_bypass_update(tif);
}
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(x86_virt_spec_ctrl);
static void x86_amd_ssb_disable(void)
{
u64 msrval = x86_amd_ls_cfg_base | x86_amd_ls_cfg_ssbd_mask;
if (boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_VIRT_SSBD))
wrmsrl(MSR_AMD64_VIRT_SPEC_CTRL, SPEC_CTRL_SSBD);
else if (boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_LS_CFG_SSBD))
wrmsrl(MSR_AMD64_LS_CFG, msrval);
}
#ifdef RETPOLINE
static bool spectre_v2_bad_module;
bool retpoline_module_ok(bool has_retpoline)
{
if (spectre_v2_enabled == SPECTRE_V2_NONE || has_retpoline)
return true;
pr_err("System may be vulnerable to spectre v2\n");
spectre_v2_bad_module = true;
return false;
}
static inline const char *spectre_v2_module_string(void)
{
return spectre_v2_bad_module ? " - vulnerable module loaded" : "";
}
#else
static inline const char *spectre_v2_module_string(void) { return ""; }
#endif
static void __init spec2_print_if_insecure(const char *reason)
{
if (boot_cpu_has_bug(X86_BUG_SPECTRE_V2))
pr_info("%s selected on command line.\n", reason);
}
static void __init spec2_print_if_secure(const char *reason)
{
if (!boot_cpu_has_bug(X86_BUG_SPECTRE_V2))
pr_info("%s selected on command line.\n", reason);
}
static inline bool retp_compiler(void)
{
return __is_defined(RETPOLINE);
}
static inline bool match_option(const char *arg, int arglen, const char *opt)
{
int len = strlen(opt);
return len == arglen && !strncmp(arg, opt, len);
}
static const struct {
const char *option;
enum spectre_v2_mitigation_cmd cmd;
bool secure;
} mitigation_options[] = {
{ "off", SPECTRE_V2_CMD_NONE, false },
{ "on", SPECTRE_V2_CMD_FORCE, true },
{ "retpoline", SPECTRE_V2_CMD_RETPOLINE, false },
{ "retpoline,amd", SPECTRE_V2_CMD_RETPOLINE_AMD, false },
{ "retpoline,generic", SPECTRE_V2_CMD_RETPOLINE_GENERIC, false },
{ "auto", SPECTRE_V2_CMD_AUTO, false },
};
static enum spectre_v2_mitigation_cmd __init spectre_v2_parse_cmdline(void)
{
char arg[20];
int ret, i;
enum spectre_v2_mitigation_cmd cmd = SPECTRE_V2_CMD_AUTO;
if (cmdline_find_option_bool(boot_command_line, "nospectre_v2"))
return SPECTRE_V2_CMD_NONE;
else {
ret = cmdline_find_option(boot_command_line, "spectre_v2", arg, sizeof(arg));
if (ret < 0)
return SPECTRE_V2_CMD_AUTO;
for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(mitigation_options); i++) {
if (!match_option(arg, ret, mitigation_options[i].option))
continue;
cmd = mitigation_options[i].cmd;
break;
}
if (i >= ARRAY_SIZE(mitigation_options)) {
pr_err("unknown option (%s). Switching to AUTO select\n", arg);
return SPECTRE_V2_CMD_AUTO;
}
}
if ((cmd == SPECTRE_V2_CMD_RETPOLINE ||
cmd == SPECTRE_V2_CMD_RETPOLINE_AMD ||
cmd == SPECTRE_V2_CMD_RETPOLINE_GENERIC) &&
!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_RETPOLINE)) {
pr_err("%s selected but not compiled in. Switching to AUTO select\n", mitigation_options[i].option);
return SPECTRE_V2_CMD_AUTO;
}
if (cmd == SPECTRE_V2_CMD_RETPOLINE_AMD &&
boot_cpu_data.x86_vendor != X86_VENDOR_AMD) {
pr_err("retpoline,amd selected but CPU is not AMD. Switching to AUTO select\n");
return SPECTRE_V2_CMD_AUTO;
}
if (mitigation_options[i].secure)
spec2_print_if_secure(mitigation_options[i].option);
else
spec2_print_if_insecure(mitigation_options[i].option);
return cmd;
}
x86/retpoline: Fill RSB on context switch for affected CPUs On context switch from a shallow call stack to a deeper one, as the CPU does 'ret' up the deeper side it may encounter RSB entries (predictions for where the 'ret' goes to) which were populated in userspace. This is problematic if neither SMEP nor KPTI (the latter of which marks userspace pages as NX for the kernel) are active, as malicious code in userspace may then be executed speculatively. Overwrite the CPU's return prediction stack with calls which are predicted to return to an infinite loop, to "capture" speculation if this happens. This is required both for retpoline, and also in conjunction with IBRS for !SMEP && !KPTI. On Skylake+ the problem is slightly different, and an *underflow* of the RSB may cause errant branch predictions to occur. So there it's not so much overwrite, as *filling* the RSB to attempt to prevent it getting empty. This is only a partial solution for Skylake+ since there are many other conditions which may result in the RSB becoming empty. The full solution on Skylake+ is to use IBRS, which will prevent the problem even when the RSB becomes empty. With IBRS, the RSB-stuffing will not be required on context switch. [ tglx: Added missing vendor check and slighty massaged comments and changelog ] Signed-off-by: David Woodhouse <dwmw@amazon.co.uk> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Acked-by: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.intel.com> Cc: gnomes@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk Cc: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com> Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com> Cc: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com> Cc: thomas.lendacky@amd.com Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Jiri Kosina <jikos@kernel.org> Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net> Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com> Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@google.com> Cc: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com> Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Paul Turner <pjt@google.com> Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/1515779365-9032-1-git-send-email-dwmw@amazon.co.uk
2018-01-12 17:49:25 +00:00
/* Check for Skylake-like CPUs (for RSB handling) */
static bool __init is_skylake_era(void)
{
if (boot_cpu_data.x86_vendor == X86_VENDOR_INTEL &&
boot_cpu_data.x86 == 6) {
switch (boot_cpu_data.x86_model) {
case INTEL_FAM6_SKYLAKE_MOBILE:
case INTEL_FAM6_SKYLAKE_DESKTOP:
case INTEL_FAM6_SKYLAKE_X:
case INTEL_FAM6_KABYLAKE_MOBILE:
case INTEL_FAM6_KABYLAKE_DESKTOP:
return true;
}
}
return false;
}
static void __init spectre_v2_select_mitigation(void)
{
enum spectre_v2_mitigation_cmd cmd = spectre_v2_parse_cmdline();
enum spectre_v2_mitigation mode = SPECTRE_V2_NONE;
/*
* If the CPU is not affected and the command line mode is NONE or AUTO
* then nothing to do.
*/
if (!boot_cpu_has_bug(X86_BUG_SPECTRE_V2) &&
(cmd == SPECTRE_V2_CMD_NONE || cmd == SPECTRE_V2_CMD_AUTO))
return;
switch (cmd) {
case SPECTRE_V2_CMD_NONE:
return;
case SPECTRE_V2_CMD_FORCE:
case SPECTRE_V2_CMD_AUTO:
if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_RETPOLINE))
goto retpoline_auto;
break;
case SPECTRE_V2_CMD_RETPOLINE_AMD:
if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_RETPOLINE))
goto retpoline_amd;
break;
case SPECTRE_V2_CMD_RETPOLINE_GENERIC:
if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_RETPOLINE))
goto retpoline_generic;
break;
case SPECTRE_V2_CMD_RETPOLINE:
if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_RETPOLINE))
goto retpoline_auto;
break;
}
pr_err("Spectre mitigation: kernel not compiled with retpoline; no mitigation available!");
return;
retpoline_auto:
if (boot_cpu_data.x86_vendor == X86_VENDOR_AMD) {
retpoline_amd:
if (!boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_LFENCE_RDTSC)) {
pr_err("Spectre mitigation: LFENCE not serializing, switching to generic retpoline\n");
goto retpoline_generic;
}
mode = retp_compiler() ? SPECTRE_V2_RETPOLINE_AMD :
SPECTRE_V2_RETPOLINE_MINIMAL_AMD;
setup_force_cpu_cap(X86_FEATURE_RETPOLINE_AMD);
setup_force_cpu_cap(X86_FEATURE_RETPOLINE);
} else {
retpoline_generic:
mode = retp_compiler() ? SPECTRE_V2_RETPOLINE_GENERIC :
SPECTRE_V2_RETPOLINE_MINIMAL;
setup_force_cpu_cap(X86_FEATURE_RETPOLINE);
}
spectre_v2_enabled = mode;
pr_info("%s\n", spectre_v2_strings[mode]);
x86/retpoline: Fill RSB on context switch for affected CPUs On context switch from a shallow call stack to a deeper one, as the CPU does 'ret' up the deeper side it may encounter RSB entries (predictions for where the 'ret' goes to) which were populated in userspace. This is problematic if neither SMEP nor KPTI (the latter of which marks userspace pages as NX for the kernel) are active, as malicious code in userspace may then be executed speculatively. Overwrite the CPU's return prediction stack with calls which are predicted to return to an infinite loop, to "capture" speculation if this happens. This is required both for retpoline, and also in conjunction with IBRS for !SMEP && !KPTI. On Skylake+ the problem is slightly different, and an *underflow* of the RSB may cause errant branch predictions to occur. So there it's not so much overwrite, as *filling* the RSB to attempt to prevent it getting empty. This is only a partial solution for Skylake+ since there are many other conditions which may result in the RSB becoming empty. The full solution on Skylake+ is to use IBRS, which will prevent the problem even when the RSB becomes empty. With IBRS, the RSB-stuffing will not be required on context switch. [ tglx: Added missing vendor check and slighty massaged comments and changelog ] Signed-off-by: David Woodhouse <dwmw@amazon.co.uk> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Acked-by: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.intel.com> Cc: gnomes@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk Cc: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com> Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com> Cc: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com> Cc: thomas.lendacky@amd.com Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Jiri Kosina <jikos@kernel.org> Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net> Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com> Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@google.com> Cc: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com> Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Paul Turner <pjt@google.com> Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/1515779365-9032-1-git-send-email-dwmw@amazon.co.uk
2018-01-12 17:49:25 +00:00
/*
* If neither SMEP nor PTI are available, there is a risk of
x86/retpoline: Fill RSB on context switch for affected CPUs On context switch from a shallow call stack to a deeper one, as the CPU does 'ret' up the deeper side it may encounter RSB entries (predictions for where the 'ret' goes to) which were populated in userspace. This is problematic if neither SMEP nor KPTI (the latter of which marks userspace pages as NX for the kernel) are active, as malicious code in userspace may then be executed speculatively. Overwrite the CPU's return prediction stack with calls which are predicted to return to an infinite loop, to "capture" speculation if this happens. This is required both for retpoline, and also in conjunction with IBRS for !SMEP && !KPTI. On Skylake+ the problem is slightly different, and an *underflow* of the RSB may cause errant branch predictions to occur. So there it's not so much overwrite, as *filling* the RSB to attempt to prevent it getting empty. This is only a partial solution for Skylake+ since there are many other conditions which may result in the RSB becoming empty. The full solution on Skylake+ is to use IBRS, which will prevent the problem even when the RSB becomes empty. With IBRS, the RSB-stuffing will not be required on context switch. [ tglx: Added missing vendor check and slighty massaged comments and changelog ] Signed-off-by: David Woodhouse <dwmw@amazon.co.uk> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Acked-by: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.intel.com> Cc: gnomes@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk Cc: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com> Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com> Cc: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com> Cc: thomas.lendacky@amd.com Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Jiri Kosina <jikos@kernel.org> Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net> Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com> Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@google.com> Cc: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com> Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Paul Turner <pjt@google.com> Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/1515779365-9032-1-git-send-email-dwmw@amazon.co.uk
2018-01-12 17:49:25 +00:00
* hitting userspace addresses in the RSB after a context switch
* from a shallow call stack to a deeper one. To prevent this fill
* the entire RSB, even when using IBRS.
*
* Skylake era CPUs have a separate issue with *underflow* of the
* RSB, when they will predict 'ret' targets from the generic BTB.
* The proper mitigation for this is IBRS. If IBRS is not supported
* or deactivated in favour of retpolines the RSB fill on context
* switch is required.
*/
if ((!boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_PTI) &&
!boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_SMEP)) || is_skylake_era()) {
setup_force_cpu_cap(X86_FEATURE_RSB_CTXSW);
pr_info("Spectre v2 mitigation: Filling RSB on context switch\n");
x86/retpoline: Fill RSB on context switch for affected CPUs On context switch from a shallow call stack to a deeper one, as the CPU does 'ret' up the deeper side it may encounter RSB entries (predictions for where the 'ret' goes to) which were populated in userspace. This is problematic if neither SMEP nor KPTI (the latter of which marks userspace pages as NX for the kernel) are active, as malicious code in userspace may then be executed speculatively. Overwrite the CPU's return prediction stack with calls which are predicted to return to an infinite loop, to "capture" speculation if this happens. This is required both for retpoline, and also in conjunction with IBRS for !SMEP && !KPTI. On Skylake+ the problem is slightly different, and an *underflow* of the RSB may cause errant branch predictions to occur. So there it's not so much overwrite, as *filling* the RSB to attempt to prevent it getting empty. This is only a partial solution for Skylake+ since there are many other conditions which may result in the RSB becoming empty. The full solution on Skylake+ is to use IBRS, which will prevent the problem even when the RSB becomes empty. With IBRS, the RSB-stuffing will not be required on context switch. [ tglx: Added missing vendor check and slighty massaged comments and changelog ] Signed-off-by: David Woodhouse <dwmw@amazon.co.uk> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Acked-by: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.intel.com> Cc: gnomes@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk Cc: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com> Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com> Cc: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com> Cc: thomas.lendacky@amd.com Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Jiri Kosina <jikos@kernel.org> Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net> Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com> Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@google.com> Cc: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com> Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Paul Turner <pjt@google.com> Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/1515779365-9032-1-git-send-email-dwmw@amazon.co.uk
2018-01-12 17:49:25 +00:00
}
/* Initialize Indirect Branch Prediction Barrier if supported */
if (boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_IBPB)) {
setup_force_cpu_cap(X86_FEATURE_USE_IBPB);
pr_info("Spectre v2 mitigation: Enabling Indirect Branch Prediction Barrier\n");
}
/*
* Retpoline means the kernel is safe because it has no indirect
* branches. But firmware isn't, so use IBRS to protect that.
*/
if (boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_IBRS)) {
setup_force_cpu_cap(X86_FEATURE_USE_IBRS_FW);
pr_info("Enabling Restricted Speculation for firmware calls\n");
}
}
x86/bugs: Provide boot parameters for the spec_store_bypass_disable mitigation Contemporary high performance processors use a common industry-wide optimization known as "Speculative Store Bypass" in which loads from addresses to which a recent store has occurred may (speculatively) see an older value. Intel refers to this feature as "Memory Disambiguation" which is part of their "Smart Memory Access" capability. Memory Disambiguation can expose a cache side-channel attack against such speculatively read values. An attacker can create exploit code that allows them to read memory outside of a sandbox environment (for example, malicious JavaScript in a web page), or to perform more complex attacks against code running within the same privilege level, e.g. via the stack. As a first step to mitigate against such attacks, provide two boot command line control knobs: nospec_store_bypass_disable spec_store_bypass_disable=[off,auto,on] By default affected x86 processors will power on with Speculative Store Bypass enabled. Hence the provided kernel parameters are written from the point of view of whether to enable a mitigation or not. The parameters are as follows: - auto - Kernel detects whether your CPU model contains an implementation of Speculative Store Bypass and picks the most appropriate mitigation. - on - disable Speculative Store Bypass - off - enable Speculative Store Bypass [ tglx: Reordered the checks so that the whole evaluation is not done when the CPU does not support RDS ] Signed-off-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Reviewed-by: Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de> Reviewed-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
2018-04-26 02:04:21 +00:00
#undef pr_fmt
#define pr_fmt(fmt) "Speculative Store Bypass: " fmt
static enum ssb_mitigation ssb_mode __ro_after_init = SPEC_STORE_BYPASS_NONE;
x86/bugs: Provide boot parameters for the spec_store_bypass_disable mitigation Contemporary high performance processors use a common industry-wide optimization known as "Speculative Store Bypass" in which loads from addresses to which a recent store has occurred may (speculatively) see an older value. Intel refers to this feature as "Memory Disambiguation" which is part of their "Smart Memory Access" capability. Memory Disambiguation can expose a cache side-channel attack against such speculatively read values. An attacker can create exploit code that allows them to read memory outside of a sandbox environment (for example, malicious JavaScript in a web page), or to perform more complex attacks against code running within the same privilege level, e.g. via the stack. As a first step to mitigate against such attacks, provide two boot command line control knobs: nospec_store_bypass_disable spec_store_bypass_disable=[off,auto,on] By default affected x86 processors will power on with Speculative Store Bypass enabled. Hence the provided kernel parameters are written from the point of view of whether to enable a mitigation or not. The parameters are as follows: - auto - Kernel detects whether your CPU model contains an implementation of Speculative Store Bypass and picks the most appropriate mitigation. - on - disable Speculative Store Bypass - off - enable Speculative Store Bypass [ tglx: Reordered the checks so that the whole evaluation is not done when the CPU does not support RDS ] Signed-off-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Reviewed-by: Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de> Reviewed-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
2018-04-26 02:04:21 +00:00
/* The kernel command line selection */
enum ssb_mitigation_cmd {
SPEC_STORE_BYPASS_CMD_NONE,
SPEC_STORE_BYPASS_CMD_AUTO,
SPEC_STORE_BYPASS_CMD_ON,
x86/speculation: Add prctl for Speculative Store Bypass mitigation Add prctl based control for Speculative Store Bypass mitigation and make it the default mitigation for Intel and AMD. Andi Kleen provided the following rationale (slightly redacted): There are multiple levels of impact of Speculative Store Bypass: 1) JITed sandbox. It cannot invoke system calls, but can do PRIME+PROBE and may have call interfaces to other code 2) Native code process. No protection inside the process at this level. 3) Kernel. 4) Between processes. The prctl tries to protect against case (1) doing attacks. If the untrusted code can do random system calls then control is already lost in a much worse way. So there needs to be system call protection in some way (using a JIT not allowing them or seccomp). Or rather if the process can subvert its environment somehow to do the prctl it can already execute arbitrary code, which is much worse than SSB. To put it differently, the point of the prctl is to not allow JITed code to read data it shouldn't read from its JITed sandbox. If it already has escaped its sandbox then it can already read everything it wants in its address space, and do much worse. The ability to control Speculative Store Bypass allows to enable the protection selectively without affecting overall system performance. Based on an initial patch from Tim Chen. Completely rewritten. Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Reviewed-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>
2018-04-29 13:26:40 +00:00
SPEC_STORE_BYPASS_CMD_PRCTL,
SPEC_STORE_BYPASS_CMD_SECCOMP,
x86/bugs: Provide boot parameters for the spec_store_bypass_disable mitigation Contemporary high performance processors use a common industry-wide optimization known as "Speculative Store Bypass" in which loads from addresses to which a recent store has occurred may (speculatively) see an older value. Intel refers to this feature as "Memory Disambiguation" which is part of their "Smart Memory Access" capability. Memory Disambiguation can expose a cache side-channel attack against such speculatively read values. An attacker can create exploit code that allows them to read memory outside of a sandbox environment (for example, malicious JavaScript in a web page), or to perform more complex attacks against code running within the same privilege level, e.g. via the stack. As a first step to mitigate against such attacks, provide two boot command line control knobs: nospec_store_bypass_disable spec_store_bypass_disable=[off,auto,on] By default affected x86 processors will power on with Speculative Store Bypass enabled. Hence the provided kernel parameters are written from the point of view of whether to enable a mitigation or not. The parameters are as follows: - auto - Kernel detects whether your CPU model contains an implementation of Speculative Store Bypass and picks the most appropriate mitigation. - on - disable Speculative Store Bypass - off - enable Speculative Store Bypass [ tglx: Reordered the checks so that the whole evaluation is not done when the CPU does not support RDS ] Signed-off-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Reviewed-by: Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de> Reviewed-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
2018-04-26 02:04:21 +00:00
};
static const char *ssb_strings[] = {
[SPEC_STORE_BYPASS_NONE] = "Vulnerable",
x86/speculation: Add prctl for Speculative Store Bypass mitigation Add prctl based control for Speculative Store Bypass mitigation and make it the default mitigation for Intel and AMD. Andi Kleen provided the following rationale (slightly redacted): There are multiple levels of impact of Speculative Store Bypass: 1) JITed sandbox. It cannot invoke system calls, but can do PRIME+PROBE and may have call interfaces to other code 2) Native code process. No protection inside the process at this level. 3) Kernel. 4) Between processes. The prctl tries to protect against case (1) doing attacks. If the untrusted code can do random system calls then control is already lost in a much worse way. So there needs to be system call protection in some way (using a JIT not allowing them or seccomp). Or rather if the process can subvert its environment somehow to do the prctl it can already execute arbitrary code, which is much worse than SSB. To put it differently, the point of the prctl is to not allow JITed code to read data it shouldn't read from its JITed sandbox. If it already has escaped its sandbox then it can already read everything it wants in its address space, and do much worse. The ability to control Speculative Store Bypass allows to enable the protection selectively without affecting overall system performance. Based on an initial patch from Tim Chen. Completely rewritten. Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Reviewed-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>
2018-04-29 13:26:40 +00:00
[SPEC_STORE_BYPASS_DISABLE] = "Mitigation: Speculative Store Bypass disabled",
[SPEC_STORE_BYPASS_PRCTL] = "Mitigation: Speculative Store Bypass disabled via prctl",
[SPEC_STORE_BYPASS_SECCOMP] = "Mitigation: Speculative Store Bypass disabled via prctl and seccomp",
x86/bugs: Provide boot parameters for the spec_store_bypass_disable mitigation Contemporary high performance processors use a common industry-wide optimization known as "Speculative Store Bypass" in which loads from addresses to which a recent store has occurred may (speculatively) see an older value. Intel refers to this feature as "Memory Disambiguation" which is part of their "Smart Memory Access" capability. Memory Disambiguation can expose a cache side-channel attack against such speculatively read values. An attacker can create exploit code that allows them to read memory outside of a sandbox environment (for example, malicious JavaScript in a web page), or to perform more complex attacks against code running within the same privilege level, e.g. via the stack. As a first step to mitigate against such attacks, provide two boot command line control knobs: nospec_store_bypass_disable spec_store_bypass_disable=[off,auto,on] By default affected x86 processors will power on with Speculative Store Bypass enabled. Hence the provided kernel parameters are written from the point of view of whether to enable a mitigation or not. The parameters are as follows: - auto - Kernel detects whether your CPU model contains an implementation of Speculative Store Bypass and picks the most appropriate mitigation. - on - disable Speculative Store Bypass - off - enable Speculative Store Bypass [ tglx: Reordered the checks so that the whole evaluation is not done when the CPU does not support RDS ] Signed-off-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Reviewed-by: Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de> Reviewed-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
2018-04-26 02:04:21 +00:00
};
static const struct {
const char *option;
enum ssb_mitigation_cmd cmd;
} ssb_mitigation_options[] = {
{ "auto", SPEC_STORE_BYPASS_CMD_AUTO }, /* Platform decides */
{ "on", SPEC_STORE_BYPASS_CMD_ON }, /* Disable Speculative Store Bypass */
{ "off", SPEC_STORE_BYPASS_CMD_NONE }, /* Don't touch Speculative Store Bypass */
{ "prctl", SPEC_STORE_BYPASS_CMD_PRCTL }, /* Disable Speculative Store Bypass via prctl */
{ "seccomp", SPEC_STORE_BYPASS_CMD_SECCOMP }, /* Disable Speculative Store Bypass via prctl and seccomp */
x86/bugs: Provide boot parameters for the spec_store_bypass_disable mitigation Contemporary high performance processors use a common industry-wide optimization known as "Speculative Store Bypass" in which loads from addresses to which a recent store has occurred may (speculatively) see an older value. Intel refers to this feature as "Memory Disambiguation" which is part of their "Smart Memory Access" capability. Memory Disambiguation can expose a cache side-channel attack against such speculatively read values. An attacker can create exploit code that allows them to read memory outside of a sandbox environment (for example, malicious JavaScript in a web page), or to perform more complex attacks against code running within the same privilege level, e.g. via the stack. As a first step to mitigate against such attacks, provide two boot command line control knobs: nospec_store_bypass_disable spec_store_bypass_disable=[off,auto,on] By default affected x86 processors will power on with Speculative Store Bypass enabled. Hence the provided kernel parameters are written from the point of view of whether to enable a mitigation or not. The parameters are as follows: - auto - Kernel detects whether your CPU model contains an implementation of Speculative Store Bypass and picks the most appropriate mitigation. - on - disable Speculative Store Bypass - off - enable Speculative Store Bypass [ tglx: Reordered the checks so that the whole evaluation is not done when the CPU does not support RDS ] Signed-off-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Reviewed-by: Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de> Reviewed-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
2018-04-26 02:04:21 +00:00
};
static enum ssb_mitigation_cmd __init ssb_parse_cmdline(void)
{
enum ssb_mitigation_cmd cmd = SPEC_STORE_BYPASS_CMD_AUTO;
char arg[20];
int ret, i;
if (cmdline_find_option_bool(boot_command_line, "nospec_store_bypass_disable")) {
return SPEC_STORE_BYPASS_CMD_NONE;
} else {
ret = cmdline_find_option(boot_command_line, "spec_store_bypass_disable",
arg, sizeof(arg));
if (ret < 0)
return SPEC_STORE_BYPASS_CMD_AUTO;
for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(ssb_mitigation_options); i++) {
if (!match_option(arg, ret, ssb_mitigation_options[i].option))
continue;
cmd = ssb_mitigation_options[i].cmd;
break;
}
if (i >= ARRAY_SIZE(ssb_mitigation_options)) {
pr_err("unknown option (%s). Switching to AUTO select\n", arg);
return SPEC_STORE_BYPASS_CMD_AUTO;
}
}
return cmd;
}
static enum ssb_mitigation __init __ssb_select_mitigation(void)
x86/bugs: Provide boot parameters for the spec_store_bypass_disable mitigation Contemporary high performance processors use a common industry-wide optimization known as "Speculative Store Bypass" in which loads from addresses to which a recent store has occurred may (speculatively) see an older value. Intel refers to this feature as "Memory Disambiguation" which is part of their "Smart Memory Access" capability. Memory Disambiguation can expose a cache side-channel attack against such speculatively read values. An attacker can create exploit code that allows them to read memory outside of a sandbox environment (for example, malicious JavaScript in a web page), or to perform more complex attacks against code running within the same privilege level, e.g. via the stack. As a first step to mitigate against such attacks, provide two boot command line control knobs: nospec_store_bypass_disable spec_store_bypass_disable=[off,auto,on] By default affected x86 processors will power on with Speculative Store Bypass enabled. Hence the provided kernel parameters are written from the point of view of whether to enable a mitigation or not. The parameters are as follows: - auto - Kernel detects whether your CPU model contains an implementation of Speculative Store Bypass and picks the most appropriate mitigation. - on - disable Speculative Store Bypass - off - enable Speculative Store Bypass [ tglx: Reordered the checks so that the whole evaluation is not done when the CPU does not support RDS ] Signed-off-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Reviewed-by: Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de> Reviewed-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
2018-04-26 02:04:21 +00:00
{
enum ssb_mitigation mode = SPEC_STORE_BYPASS_NONE;
enum ssb_mitigation_cmd cmd;
if (!boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_SSBD))
x86/bugs: Provide boot parameters for the spec_store_bypass_disable mitigation Contemporary high performance processors use a common industry-wide optimization known as "Speculative Store Bypass" in which loads from addresses to which a recent store has occurred may (speculatively) see an older value. Intel refers to this feature as "Memory Disambiguation" which is part of their "Smart Memory Access" capability. Memory Disambiguation can expose a cache side-channel attack against such speculatively read values. An attacker can create exploit code that allows them to read memory outside of a sandbox environment (for example, malicious JavaScript in a web page), or to perform more complex attacks against code running within the same privilege level, e.g. via the stack. As a first step to mitigate against such attacks, provide two boot command line control knobs: nospec_store_bypass_disable spec_store_bypass_disable=[off,auto,on] By default affected x86 processors will power on with Speculative Store Bypass enabled. Hence the provided kernel parameters are written from the point of view of whether to enable a mitigation or not. The parameters are as follows: - auto - Kernel detects whether your CPU model contains an implementation of Speculative Store Bypass and picks the most appropriate mitigation. - on - disable Speculative Store Bypass - off - enable Speculative Store Bypass [ tglx: Reordered the checks so that the whole evaluation is not done when the CPU does not support RDS ] Signed-off-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Reviewed-by: Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de> Reviewed-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
2018-04-26 02:04:21 +00:00
return mode;
cmd = ssb_parse_cmdline();
if (!boot_cpu_has_bug(X86_BUG_SPEC_STORE_BYPASS) &&
(cmd == SPEC_STORE_BYPASS_CMD_NONE ||
cmd == SPEC_STORE_BYPASS_CMD_AUTO))
return mode;
switch (cmd) {
case SPEC_STORE_BYPASS_CMD_AUTO:
case SPEC_STORE_BYPASS_CMD_SECCOMP:
/*
* Choose prctl+seccomp as the default mode if seccomp is
* enabled.
*/
if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SECCOMP))
mode = SPEC_STORE_BYPASS_SECCOMP;
else
mode = SPEC_STORE_BYPASS_PRCTL;
x86/speculation: Add prctl for Speculative Store Bypass mitigation Add prctl based control for Speculative Store Bypass mitigation and make it the default mitigation for Intel and AMD. Andi Kleen provided the following rationale (slightly redacted): There are multiple levels of impact of Speculative Store Bypass: 1) JITed sandbox. It cannot invoke system calls, but can do PRIME+PROBE and may have call interfaces to other code 2) Native code process. No protection inside the process at this level. 3) Kernel. 4) Between processes. The prctl tries to protect against case (1) doing attacks. If the untrusted code can do random system calls then control is already lost in a much worse way. So there needs to be system call protection in some way (using a JIT not allowing them or seccomp). Or rather if the process can subvert its environment somehow to do the prctl it can already execute arbitrary code, which is much worse than SSB. To put it differently, the point of the prctl is to not allow JITed code to read data it shouldn't read from its JITed sandbox. If it already has escaped its sandbox then it can already read everything it wants in its address space, and do much worse. The ability to control Speculative Store Bypass allows to enable the protection selectively without affecting overall system performance. Based on an initial patch from Tim Chen. Completely rewritten. Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Reviewed-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>
2018-04-29 13:26:40 +00:00
break;
x86/bugs: Provide boot parameters for the spec_store_bypass_disable mitigation Contemporary high performance processors use a common industry-wide optimization known as "Speculative Store Bypass" in which loads from addresses to which a recent store has occurred may (speculatively) see an older value. Intel refers to this feature as "Memory Disambiguation" which is part of their "Smart Memory Access" capability. Memory Disambiguation can expose a cache side-channel attack against such speculatively read values. An attacker can create exploit code that allows them to read memory outside of a sandbox environment (for example, malicious JavaScript in a web page), or to perform more complex attacks against code running within the same privilege level, e.g. via the stack. As a first step to mitigate against such attacks, provide two boot command line control knobs: nospec_store_bypass_disable spec_store_bypass_disable=[off,auto,on] By default affected x86 processors will power on with Speculative Store Bypass enabled. Hence the provided kernel parameters are written from the point of view of whether to enable a mitigation or not. The parameters are as follows: - auto - Kernel detects whether your CPU model contains an implementation of Speculative Store Bypass and picks the most appropriate mitigation. - on - disable Speculative Store Bypass - off - enable Speculative Store Bypass [ tglx: Reordered the checks so that the whole evaluation is not done when the CPU does not support RDS ] Signed-off-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Reviewed-by: Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de> Reviewed-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
2018-04-26 02:04:21 +00:00
case SPEC_STORE_BYPASS_CMD_ON:
mode = SPEC_STORE_BYPASS_DISABLE;
break;
x86/speculation: Add prctl for Speculative Store Bypass mitigation Add prctl based control for Speculative Store Bypass mitigation and make it the default mitigation for Intel and AMD. Andi Kleen provided the following rationale (slightly redacted): There are multiple levels of impact of Speculative Store Bypass: 1) JITed sandbox. It cannot invoke system calls, but can do PRIME+PROBE and may have call interfaces to other code 2) Native code process. No protection inside the process at this level. 3) Kernel. 4) Between processes. The prctl tries to protect against case (1) doing attacks. If the untrusted code can do random system calls then control is already lost in a much worse way. So there needs to be system call protection in some way (using a JIT not allowing them or seccomp). Or rather if the process can subvert its environment somehow to do the prctl it can already execute arbitrary code, which is much worse than SSB. To put it differently, the point of the prctl is to not allow JITed code to read data it shouldn't read from its JITed sandbox. If it already has escaped its sandbox then it can already read everything it wants in its address space, and do much worse. The ability to control Speculative Store Bypass allows to enable the protection selectively without affecting overall system performance. Based on an initial patch from Tim Chen. Completely rewritten. Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Reviewed-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>
2018-04-29 13:26:40 +00:00
case SPEC_STORE_BYPASS_CMD_PRCTL:
mode = SPEC_STORE_BYPASS_PRCTL;
break;
x86/bugs: Provide boot parameters for the spec_store_bypass_disable mitigation Contemporary high performance processors use a common industry-wide optimization known as "Speculative Store Bypass" in which loads from addresses to which a recent store has occurred may (speculatively) see an older value. Intel refers to this feature as "Memory Disambiguation" which is part of their "Smart Memory Access" capability. Memory Disambiguation can expose a cache side-channel attack against such speculatively read values. An attacker can create exploit code that allows them to read memory outside of a sandbox environment (for example, malicious JavaScript in a web page), or to perform more complex attacks against code running within the same privilege level, e.g. via the stack. As a first step to mitigate against such attacks, provide two boot command line control knobs: nospec_store_bypass_disable spec_store_bypass_disable=[off,auto,on] By default affected x86 processors will power on with Speculative Store Bypass enabled. Hence the provided kernel parameters are written from the point of view of whether to enable a mitigation or not. The parameters are as follows: - auto - Kernel detects whether your CPU model contains an implementation of Speculative Store Bypass and picks the most appropriate mitigation. - on - disable Speculative Store Bypass - off - enable Speculative Store Bypass [ tglx: Reordered the checks so that the whole evaluation is not done when the CPU does not support RDS ] Signed-off-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Reviewed-by: Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de> Reviewed-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
2018-04-26 02:04:21 +00:00
case SPEC_STORE_BYPASS_CMD_NONE:
break;
}
/*
* We have three CPU feature flags that are in play here:
* - X86_BUG_SPEC_STORE_BYPASS - CPU is susceptible.
* - X86_FEATURE_SSBD - CPU is able to turn off speculative store bypass
* - X86_FEATURE_SPEC_STORE_BYPASS_DISABLE - engage the mitigation
*/
x86/speculation: Add prctl for Speculative Store Bypass mitigation Add prctl based control for Speculative Store Bypass mitigation and make it the default mitigation for Intel and AMD. Andi Kleen provided the following rationale (slightly redacted): There are multiple levels of impact of Speculative Store Bypass: 1) JITed sandbox. It cannot invoke system calls, but can do PRIME+PROBE and may have call interfaces to other code 2) Native code process. No protection inside the process at this level. 3) Kernel. 4) Between processes. The prctl tries to protect against case (1) doing attacks. If the untrusted code can do random system calls then control is already lost in a much worse way. So there needs to be system call protection in some way (using a JIT not allowing them or seccomp). Or rather if the process can subvert its environment somehow to do the prctl it can already execute arbitrary code, which is much worse than SSB. To put it differently, the point of the prctl is to not allow JITed code to read data it shouldn't read from its JITed sandbox. If it already has escaped its sandbox then it can already read everything it wants in its address space, and do much worse. The ability to control Speculative Store Bypass allows to enable the protection selectively without affecting overall system performance. Based on an initial patch from Tim Chen. Completely rewritten. Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Reviewed-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>
2018-04-29 13:26:40 +00:00
if (mode == SPEC_STORE_BYPASS_DISABLE) {
x86/bugs: Provide boot parameters for the spec_store_bypass_disable mitigation Contemporary high performance processors use a common industry-wide optimization known as "Speculative Store Bypass" in which loads from addresses to which a recent store has occurred may (speculatively) see an older value. Intel refers to this feature as "Memory Disambiguation" which is part of their "Smart Memory Access" capability. Memory Disambiguation can expose a cache side-channel attack against such speculatively read values. An attacker can create exploit code that allows them to read memory outside of a sandbox environment (for example, malicious JavaScript in a web page), or to perform more complex attacks against code running within the same privilege level, e.g. via the stack. As a first step to mitigate against such attacks, provide two boot command line control knobs: nospec_store_bypass_disable spec_store_bypass_disable=[off,auto,on] By default affected x86 processors will power on with Speculative Store Bypass enabled. Hence the provided kernel parameters are written from the point of view of whether to enable a mitigation or not. The parameters are as follows: - auto - Kernel detects whether your CPU model contains an implementation of Speculative Store Bypass and picks the most appropriate mitigation. - on - disable Speculative Store Bypass - off - enable Speculative Store Bypass [ tglx: Reordered the checks so that the whole evaluation is not done when the CPU does not support RDS ] Signed-off-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Reviewed-by: Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de> Reviewed-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
2018-04-26 02:04:21 +00:00
setup_force_cpu_cap(X86_FEATURE_SPEC_STORE_BYPASS_DISABLE);
/*
* Intel uses the SPEC CTRL MSR Bit(2) for this, while AMD may
* use a completely different MSR and bit dependent on family.
*/
if (!static_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_MSR_SPEC_CTRL))
x86_amd_ssb_disable();
else {
x86_spec_ctrl_base |= SPEC_CTRL_SSBD;
x86_spec_ctrl_mask |= SPEC_CTRL_SSBD;
wrmsrl(MSR_IA32_SPEC_CTRL, x86_spec_ctrl_base);
}
}
x86/bugs: Provide boot parameters for the spec_store_bypass_disable mitigation Contemporary high performance processors use a common industry-wide optimization known as "Speculative Store Bypass" in which loads from addresses to which a recent store has occurred may (speculatively) see an older value. Intel refers to this feature as "Memory Disambiguation" which is part of their "Smart Memory Access" capability. Memory Disambiguation can expose a cache side-channel attack against such speculatively read values. An attacker can create exploit code that allows them to read memory outside of a sandbox environment (for example, malicious JavaScript in a web page), or to perform more complex attacks against code running within the same privilege level, e.g. via the stack. As a first step to mitigate against such attacks, provide two boot command line control knobs: nospec_store_bypass_disable spec_store_bypass_disable=[off,auto,on] By default affected x86 processors will power on with Speculative Store Bypass enabled. Hence the provided kernel parameters are written from the point of view of whether to enable a mitigation or not. The parameters are as follows: - auto - Kernel detects whether your CPU model contains an implementation of Speculative Store Bypass and picks the most appropriate mitigation. - on - disable Speculative Store Bypass - off - enable Speculative Store Bypass [ tglx: Reordered the checks so that the whole evaluation is not done when the CPU does not support RDS ] Signed-off-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Reviewed-by: Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de> Reviewed-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
2018-04-26 02:04:21 +00:00
return mode;
}
static void ssb_select_mitigation(void)
x86/bugs: Provide boot parameters for the spec_store_bypass_disable mitigation Contemporary high performance processors use a common industry-wide optimization known as "Speculative Store Bypass" in which loads from addresses to which a recent store has occurred may (speculatively) see an older value. Intel refers to this feature as "Memory Disambiguation" which is part of their "Smart Memory Access" capability. Memory Disambiguation can expose a cache side-channel attack against such speculatively read values. An attacker can create exploit code that allows them to read memory outside of a sandbox environment (for example, malicious JavaScript in a web page), or to perform more complex attacks against code running within the same privilege level, e.g. via the stack. As a first step to mitigate against such attacks, provide two boot command line control knobs: nospec_store_bypass_disable spec_store_bypass_disable=[off,auto,on] By default affected x86 processors will power on with Speculative Store Bypass enabled. Hence the provided kernel parameters are written from the point of view of whether to enable a mitigation or not. The parameters are as follows: - auto - Kernel detects whether your CPU model contains an implementation of Speculative Store Bypass and picks the most appropriate mitigation. - on - disable Speculative Store Bypass - off - enable Speculative Store Bypass [ tglx: Reordered the checks so that the whole evaluation is not done when the CPU does not support RDS ] Signed-off-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Reviewed-by: Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de> Reviewed-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
2018-04-26 02:04:21 +00:00
{
ssb_mode = __ssb_select_mitigation();
if (boot_cpu_has_bug(X86_BUG_SPEC_STORE_BYPASS))
pr_info("%s\n", ssb_strings[ssb_mode]);
}
#undef pr_fmt
#define pr_fmt(fmt) "Speculation prctl: " fmt
static int ssb_prctl_set(struct task_struct *task, unsigned long ctrl)
x86/speculation: Add prctl for Speculative Store Bypass mitigation Add prctl based control for Speculative Store Bypass mitigation and make it the default mitigation for Intel and AMD. Andi Kleen provided the following rationale (slightly redacted): There are multiple levels of impact of Speculative Store Bypass: 1) JITed sandbox. It cannot invoke system calls, but can do PRIME+PROBE and may have call interfaces to other code 2) Native code process. No protection inside the process at this level. 3) Kernel. 4) Between processes. The prctl tries to protect against case (1) doing attacks. If the untrusted code can do random system calls then control is already lost in a much worse way. So there needs to be system call protection in some way (using a JIT not allowing them or seccomp). Or rather if the process can subvert its environment somehow to do the prctl it can already execute arbitrary code, which is much worse than SSB. To put it differently, the point of the prctl is to not allow JITed code to read data it shouldn't read from its JITed sandbox. If it already has escaped its sandbox then it can already read everything it wants in its address space, and do much worse. The ability to control Speculative Store Bypass allows to enable the protection selectively without affecting overall system performance. Based on an initial patch from Tim Chen. Completely rewritten. Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Reviewed-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>
2018-04-29 13:26:40 +00:00
{
bool update;
x86/speculation: Add prctl for Speculative Store Bypass mitigation Add prctl based control for Speculative Store Bypass mitigation and make it the default mitigation for Intel and AMD. Andi Kleen provided the following rationale (slightly redacted): There are multiple levels of impact of Speculative Store Bypass: 1) JITed sandbox. It cannot invoke system calls, but can do PRIME+PROBE and may have call interfaces to other code 2) Native code process. No protection inside the process at this level. 3) Kernel. 4) Between processes. The prctl tries to protect against case (1) doing attacks. If the untrusted code can do random system calls then control is already lost in a much worse way. So there needs to be system call protection in some way (using a JIT not allowing them or seccomp). Or rather if the process can subvert its environment somehow to do the prctl it can already execute arbitrary code, which is much worse than SSB. To put it differently, the point of the prctl is to not allow JITed code to read data it shouldn't read from its JITed sandbox. If it already has escaped its sandbox then it can already read everything it wants in its address space, and do much worse. The ability to control Speculative Store Bypass allows to enable the protection selectively without affecting overall system performance. Based on an initial patch from Tim Chen. Completely rewritten. Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Reviewed-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>
2018-04-29 13:26:40 +00:00
if (ssb_mode != SPEC_STORE_BYPASS_PRCTL &&
ssb_mode != SPEC_STORE_BYPASS_SECCOMP)
x86/speculation: Add prctl for Speculative Store Bypass mitigation Add prctl based control for Speculative Store Bypass mitigation and make it the default mitigation for Intel and AMD. Andi Kleen provided the following rationale (slightly redacted): There are multiple levels of impact of Speculative Store Bypass: 1) JITed sandbox. It cannot invoke system calls, but can do PRIME+PROBE and may have call interfaces to other code 2) Native code process. No protection inside the process at this level. 3) Kernel. 4) Between processes. The prctl tries to protect against case (1) doing attacks. If the untrusted code can do random system calls then control is already lost in a much worse way. So there needs to be system call protection in some way (using a JIT not allowing them or seccomp). Or rather if the process can subvert its environment somehow to do the prctl it can already execute arbitrary code, which is much worse than SSB. To put it differently, the point of the prctl is to not allow JITed code to read data it shouldn't read from its JITed sandbox. If it already has escaped its sandbox then it can already read everything it wants in its address space, and do much worse. The ability to control Speculative Store Bypass allows to enable the protection selectively without affecting overall system performance. Based on an initial patch from Tim Chen. Completely rewritten. Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Reviewed-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>
2018-04-29 13:26:40 +00:00
return -ENXIO;
switch (ctrl) {
case PR_SPEC_ENABLE:
/* If speculation is force disabled, enable is not allowed */
if (task_spec_ssb_force_disable(task))
return -EPERM;
task_clear_spec_ssb_disable(task);
update = test_and_clear_tsk_thread_flag(task, TIF_SSBD);
break;
case PR_SPEC_DISABLE:
task_set_spec_ssb_disable(task);
update = !test_and_set_tsk_thread_flag(task, TIF_SSBD);
break;
case PR_SPEC_FORCE_DISABLE:
task_set_spec_ssb_disable(task);
task_set_spec_ssb_force_disable(task);
update = !test_and_set_tsk_thread_flag(task, TIF_SSBD);
break;
default:
return -ERANGE;
}
x86/speculation: Add prctl for Speculative Store Bypass mitigation Add prctl based control for Speculative Store Bypass mitigation and make it the default mitigation for Intel and AMD. Andi Kleen provided the following rationale (slightly redacted): There are multiple levels of impact of Speculative Store Bypass: 1) JITed sandbox. It cannot invoke system calls, but can do PRIME+PROBE and may have call interfaces to other code 2) Native code process. No protection inside the process at this level. 3) Kernel. 4) Between processes. The prctl tries to protect against case (1) doing attacks. If the untrusted code can do random system calls then control is already lost in a much worse way. So there needs to be system call protection in some way (using a JIT not allowing them or seccomp). Or rather if the process can subvert its environment somehow to do the prctl it can already execute arbitrary code, which is much worse than SSB. To put it differently, the point of the prctl is to not allow JITed code to read data it shouldn't read from its JITed sandbox. If it already has escaped its sandbox then it can already read everything it wants in its address space, and do much worse. The ability to control Speculative Store Bypass allows to enable the protection selectively without affecting overall system performance. Based on an initial patch from Tim Chen. Completely rewritten. Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Reviewed-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>
2018-04-29 13:26:40 +00:00
/*
* If being set on non-current task, delay setting the CPU
* mitigation until it is next scheduled.
*/
if (task == current && update)
speculative_store_bypass_update_current();
x86/speculation: Add prctl for Speculative Store Bypass mitigation Add prctl based control for Speculative Store Bypass mitigation and make it the default mitigation for Intel and AMD. Andi Kleen provided the following rationale (slightly redacted): There are multiple levels of impact of Speculative Store Bypass: 1) JITed sandbox. It cannot invoke system calls, but can do PRIME+PROBE and may have call interfaces to other code 2) Native code process. No protection inside the process at this level. 3) Kernel. 4) Between processes. The prctl tries to protect against case (1) doing attacks. If the untrusted code can do random system calls then control is already lost in a much worse way. So there needs to be system call protection in some way (using a JIT not allowing them or seccomp). Or rather if the process can subvert its environment somehow to do the prctl it can already execute arbitrary code, which is much worse than SSB. To put it differently, the point of the prctl is to not allow JITed code to read data it shouldn't read from its JITed sandbox. If it already has escaped its sandbox then it can already read everything it wants in its address space, and do much worse. The ability to control Speculative Store Bypass allows to enable the protection selectively without affecting overall system performance. Based on an initial patch from Tim Chen. Completely rewritten. Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Reviewed-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>
2018-04-29 13:26:40 +00:00
return 0;
}
int arch_prctl_spec_ctrl_set(struct task_struct *task, unsigned long which,
unsigned long ctrl)
{
switch (which) {
case PR_SPEC_STORE_BYPASS:
return ssb_prctl_set(task, ctrl);
default:
return -ENODEV;
}
}
#ifdef CONFIG_SECCOMP
void arch_seccomp_spec_mitigate(struct task_struct *task)
{
if (ssb_mode == SPEC_STORE_BYPASS_SECCOMP)
ssb_prctl_set(task, PR_SPEC_FORCE_DISABLE);
}
#endif
static int ssb_prctl_get(struct task_struct *task)
x86/speculation: Add prctl for Speculative Store Bypass mitigation Add prctl based control for Speculative Store Bypass mitigation and make it the default mitigation for Intel and AMD. Andi Kleen provided the following rationale (slightly redacted): There are multiple levels of impact of Speculative Store Bypass: 1) JITed sandbox. It cannot invoke system calls, but can do PRIME+PROBE and may have call interfaces to other code 2) Native code process. No protection inside the process at this level. 3) Kernel. 4) Between processes. The prctl tries to protect against case (1) doing attacks. If the untrusted code can do random system calls then control is already lost in a much worse way. So there needs to be system call protection in some way (using a JIT not allowing them or seccomp). Or rather if the process can subvert its environment somehow to do the prctl it can already execute arbitrary code, which is much worse than SSB. To put it differently, the point of the prctl is to not allow JITed code to read data it shouldn't read from its JITed sandbox. If it already has escaped its sandbox then it can already read everything it wants in its address space, and do much worse. The ability to control Speculative Store Bypass allows to enable the protection selectively without affecting overall system performance. Based on an initial patch from Tim Chen. Completely rewritten. Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Reviewed-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>
2018-04-29 13:26:40 +00:00
{
switch (ssb_mode) {
case SPEC_STORE_BYPASS_DISABLE:
return PR_SPEC_DISABLE;
case SPEC_STORE_BYPASS_SECCOMP:
x86/speculation: Add prctl for Speculative Store Bypass mitigation Add prctl based control for Speculative Store Bypass mitigation and make it the default mitigation for Intel and AMD. Andi Kleen provided the following rationale (slightly redacted): There are multiple levels of impact of Speculative Store Bypass: 1) JITed sandbox. It cannot invoke system calls, but can do PRIME+PROBE and may have call interfaces to other code 2) Native code process. No protection inside the process at this level. 3) Kernel. 4) Between processes. The prctl tries to protect against case (1) doing attacks. If the untrusted code can do random system calls then control is already lost in a much worse way. So there needs to be system call protection in some way (using a JIT not allowing them or seccomp). Or rather if the process can subvert its environment somehow to do the prctl it can already execute arbitrary code, which is much worse than SSB. To put it differently, the point of the prctl is to not allow JITed code to read data it shouldn't read from its JITed sandbox. If it already has escaped its sandbox then it can already read everything it wants in its address space, and do much worse. The ability to control Speculative Store Bypass allows to enable the protection selectively without affecting overall system performance. Based on an initial patch from Tim Chen. Completely rewritten. Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Reviewed-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>
2018-04-29 13:26:40 +00:00
case SPEC_STORE_BYPASS_PRCTL:
if (task_spec_ssb_force_disable(task))
return PR_SPEC_PRCTL | PR_SPEC_FORCE_DISABLE;
if (task_spec_ssb_disable(task))
x86/speculation: Add prctl for Speculative Store Bypass mitigation Add prctl based control for Speculative Store Bypass mitigation and make it the default mitigation for Intel and AMD. Andi Kleen provided the following rationale (slightly redacted): There are multiple levels of impact of Speculative Store Bypass: 1) JITed sandbox. It cannot invoke system calls, but can do PRIME+PROBE and may have call interfaces to other code 2) Native code process. No protection inside the process at this level. 3) Kernel. 4) Between processes. The prctl tries to protect against case (1) doing attacks. If the untrusted code can do random system calls then control is already lost in a much worse way. So there needs to be system call protection in some way (using a JIT not allowing them or seccomp). Or rather if the process can subvert its environment somehow to do the prctl it can already execute arbitrary code, which is much worse than SSB. To put it differently, the point of the prctl is to not allow JITed code to read data it shouldn't read from its JITed sandbox. If it already has escaped its sandbox then it can already read everything it wants in its address space, and do much worse. The ability to control Speculative Store Bypass allows to enable the protection selectively without affecting overall system performance. Based on an initial patch from Tim Chen. Completely rewritten. Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Reviewed-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>
2018-04-29 13:26:40 +00:00
return PR_SPEC_PRCTL | PR_SPEC_DISABLE;
return PR_SPEC_PRCTL | PR_SPEC_ENABLE;
default:
if (boot_cpu_has_bug(X86_BUG_SPEC_STORE_BYPASS))
return PR_SPEC_ENABLE;
return PR_SPEC_NOT_AFFECTED;
}
}
int arch_prctl_spec_ctrl_get(struct task_struct *task, unsigned long which)
x86/speculation: Add prctl for Speculative Store Bypass mitigation Add prctl based control for Speculative Store Bypass mitigation and make it the default mitigation for Intel and AMD. Andi Kleen provided the following rationale (slightly redacted): There are multiple levels of impact of Speculative Store Bypass: 1) JITed sandbox. It cannot invoke system calls, but can do PRIME+PROBE and may have call interfaces to other code 2) Native code process. No protection inside the process at this level. 3) Kernel. 4) Between processes. The prctl tries to protect against case (1) doing attacks. If the untrusted code can do random system calls then control is already lost in a much worse way. So there needs to be system call protection in some way (using a JIT not allowing them or seccomp). Or rather if the process can subvert its environment somehow to do the prctl it can already execute arbitrary code, which is much worse than SSB. To put it differently, the point of the prctl is to not allow JITed code to read data it shouldn't read from its JITed sandbox. If it already has escaped its sandbox then it can already read everything it wants in its address space, and do much worse. The ability to control Speculative Store Bypass allows to enable the protection selectively without affecting overall system performance. Based on an initial patch from Tim Chen. Completely rewritten. Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Reviewed-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>
2018-04-29 13:26:40 +00:00
{
switch (which) {
case PR_SPEC_STORE_BYPASS:
return ssb_prctl_get(task);
x86/speculation: Add prctl for Speculative Store Bypass mitigation Add prctl based control for Speculative Store Bypass mitigation and make it the default mitigation for Intel and AMD. Andi Kleen provided the following rationale (slightly redacted): There are multiple levels of impact of Speculative Store Bypass: 1) JITed sandbox. It cannot invoke system calls, but can do PRIME+PROBE and may have call interfaces to other code 2) Native code process. No protection inside the process at this level. 3) Kernel. 4) Between processes. The prctl tries to protect against case (1) doing attacks. If the untrusted code can do random system calls then control is already lost in a much worse way. So there needs to be system call protection in some way (using a JIT not allowing them or seccomp). Or rather if the process can subvert its environment somehow to do the prctl it can already execute arbitrary code, which is much worse than SSB. To put it differently, the point of the prctl is to not allow JITed code to read data it shouldn't read from its JITed sandbox. If it already has escaped its sandbox then it can already read everything it wants in its address space, and do much worse. The ability to control Speculative Store Bypass allows to enable the protection selectively without affecting overall system performance. Based on an initial patch from Tim Chen. Completely rewritten. Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Reviewed-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>
2018-04-29 13:26:40 +00:00
default:
return -ENODEV;
}
}
void x86_spec_ctrl_setup_ap(void)
{
if (boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_MSR_SPEC_CTRL))
wrmsrl(MSR_IA32_SPEC_CTRL, x86_spec_ctrl_base);
if (ssb_mode == SPEC_STORE_BYPASS_DISABLE)
x86_amd_ssb_disable();
}
#ifdef CONFIG_SYSFS
static ssize_t cpu_show_common(struct device *dev, struct device_attribute *attr,
char *buf, unsigned int bug)
{
if (!boot_cpu_has_bug(bug))
return sprintf(buf, "Not affected\n");
switch (bug) {
case X86_BUG_CPU_MELTDOWN:
if (boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_PTI))
return sprintf(buf, "Mitigation: PTI\n");
break;
case X86_BUG_SPECTRE_V1:
return sprintf(buf, "Mitigation: __user pointer sanitization\n");
case X86_BUG_SPECTRE_V2:
return sprintf(buf, "%s%s%s%s\n", spectre_v2_strings[spectre_v2_enabled],
boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_USE_IBPB) ? ", IBPB" : "",
boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_USE_IBRS_FW) ? ", IBRS_FW" : "",
spectre_v2_module_string());
x86/bugs: Provide boot parameters for the spec_store_bypass_disable mitigation Contemporary high performance processors use a common industry-wide optimization known as "Speculative Store Bypass" in which loads from addresses to which a recent store has occurred may (speculatively) see an older value. Intel refers to this feature as "Memory Disambiguation" which is part of their "Smart Memory Access" capability. Memory Disambiguation can expose a cache side-channel attack against such speculatively read values. An attacker can create exploit code that allows them to read memory outside of a sandbox environment (for example, malicious JavaScript in a web page), or to perform more complex attacks against code running within the same privilege level, e.g. via the stack. As a first step to mitigate against such attacks, provide two boot command line control knobs: nospec_store_bypass_disable spec_store_bypass_disable=[off,auto,on] By default affected x86 processors will power on with Speculative Store Bypass enabled. Hence the provided kernel parameters are written from the point of view of whether to enable a mitigation or not. The parameters are as follows: - auto - Kernel detects whether your CPU model contains an implementation of Speculative Store Bypass and picks the most appropriate mitigation. - on - disable Speculative Store Bypass - off - enable Speculative Store Bypass [ tglx: Reordered the checks so that the whole evaluation is not done when the CPU does not support RDS ] Signed-off-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Reviewed-by: Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de> Reviewed-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
2018-04-26 02:04:21 +00:00
case X86_BUG_SPEC_STORE_BYPASS:
return sprintf(buf, "%s\n", ssb_strings[ssb_mode]);
default:
break;
}
return sprintf(buf, "Vulnerable\n");
}
ssize_t cpu_show_meltdown(struct device *dev, struct device_attribute *attr, char *buf)
{
return cpu_show_common(dev, attr, buf, X86_BUG_CPU_MELTDOWN);
}
ssize_t cpu_show_spectre_v1(struct device *dev, struct device_attribute *attr, char *buf)
{
return cpu_show_common(dev, attr, buf, X86_BUG_SPECTRE_V1);
}
ssize_t cpu_show_spectre_v2(struct device *dev, struct device_attribute *attr, char *buf)
{
return cpu_show_common(dev, attr, buf, X86_BUG_SPECTRE_V2);
}
ssize_t cpu_show_spec_store_bypass(struct device *dev, struct device_attribute *attr, char *buf)
{
return cpu_show_common(dev, attr, buf, X86_BUG_SPEC_STORE_BYPASS);
}
#endif