From: "Tim Mouraveiko" <tim.ml@ipcopper.com>
Organization: IPCopper, Inc.
To: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2018 16:35:04 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: Bricked x86 CPU with software?
CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Message-ID: <5A540E38.917.14E88C54@tim.ml.ipcopper.com>
In-reply-to: <20180108233235.GB25349@amd>
References: <5A4D7986.2138.FDC590CF@tim.ml.ipcopper.com>, <5A539529.10290.130FABDC@tim.ml.ipcopper.com>, <20180108233235.GB25349@amd>
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Content-description: Mail message body
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org

> On Mon 2018-01-08 07:58:33, Tim Mouraveiko wrote:
> > > Hi!
> > >
> > > > > Is the sequence available from ring 3, or does it need ring 0?
> > > > >
> > > > > Can we get the code? Extraordinary claims and all that...
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > I did not test privilege level. Are you suggesting that I put the code out there for everyone to
> > > > see or what?
> > >
> > > Yes, that's what I'm suggesting.
> > >
> > 
> > That would be neither prudent nor practical.
> > 
> > Perhaps you did not consider the consequences. What if it is compatible with your
> > processor? Would you send me a handwritten thank you card if that processor stops
> > processing? Would you be a happy replacement-sale customer of Intel? I think you did not
> > put much thought into why we are talking about it a year later or at
> > all.
> 
> Actually, yes, thank you card. Not handwritten -- plenty of CPUs here :-).
> 
> > Unlike the now-oh-so-scary feature that was in existence for decades, that is only so scary
> > because of a "clever" idea to "cloud" host different customers on bare metal, without any
> > consideration to their security, this could affect real people not just oh-so-clever computer
> > farmers.
> 
> I don't believe you actually have a way to brick CPUs.
> 
> Yes, it is possible to brick some computers -- overwriting BIOS will
> do the trick, for example; doable from ring 0. There is more firmware
> that can be overwritten... That's old news. Worth mentioning on
> bugtraq, so manufacturer can fix it, but...
> 
> If you had something that worked directly on CPU, that would be news;
> and yes, there are fuses there, but I really doubt they can be
> manipulated by software. And I believe it would be news worth more
> than price of a CPU... Still not exactly dangerous. Usually data are
> worth more than hardware.
> 
> Ouch, and if it worked from ring 3... That would be newsworthy. That
> would be actually quite dangerous. OTOH... people did try to fuzz CPU
> instruction sets, so my bet is someone would have noticed.

You already mentioned the news part previously.

Early versions of the code would require disabling the OS by the delivery system to avoid 
interference.