Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1031533AbWLAQOP (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Dec 2006 11:14:15 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1031543AbWLAQOP (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Dec 2006 11:14:15 -0500 Received: from adelie.ubuntu.com ([82.211.81.139]:16043 "EHLO adelie.ubuntu.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1031533AbWLAQOO (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Dec 2006 11:14:14 -0500 Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] [x86] Add command line option to enable/disable hyper-threading. From: Ben Collins To: Arjan van de Ven Cc: Pavel Machek , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, torvalds@osdl.org In-Reply-To: <1164989436.3233.85.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> References: <11648607683157-git-send-email-bcollins@ubuntu.com> <11648607733630-git-send-email-bcollins@ubuntu.com> <20061201132918.GB4239@ucw.cz> <1164980500.5257.922.camel@gullible> <1164983529.3233.73.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> <1164985757.5257.933.camel@gullible> <1164989436.3233.85.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2006 11:14:02 -0500 Message-Id: <1164989642.5257.938.camel@gullible> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.8.1 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1430 Lines: 28 On Fri, 2006-12-01 at 17:10 +0100, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > > I'm just basing this on the history of the patch, which preceeds me, so > > if this is incorrect, please don't blame me for misinformation :) > > > > The original patch claims that hyper-threading opens the user up to some > > sort of security risk involving hardware limitations in protecting > > memory across the threads. I can't recall all the details. > > > > If this is wrong, I'm more than happy to just drop the whole damn patch. > > that is not correct. > I suspect what is meant is the "attack" on older openssl versions where > you could in theory get SOME information about a key in use by snooping > cache patterns in a shared cache situation. By no means is it a "direct" > leak of any kind, and openssl has since then been fixed to not have as > many key-dependent execution streams anymore. > > I would suggest you drop the patch; openssl has been long fixed, and it > was only a theoretical attack in the first place... > I'm not saying the attack isn't something that should be addressed.. but > it is, and disabling hyperthreading is not the right fix. Thanks for clearing that up. Patch withdrawn. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/