~ [ source navigation ] ~ [ diff markup ] ~ [ identifier search ] ~

TOMOYO Linux Cross Reference
Linux/Documentation/admin-guide/hw-vuln/srso.rst

Version: ~ [ linux-6.11.5 ] ~ [ linux-6.10.14 ] ~ [ linux-6.9.12 ] ~ [ linux-6.8.12 ] ~ [ linux-6.7.12 ] ~ [ linux-6.6.58 ] ~ [ linux-6.5.13 ] ~ [ linux-6.4.16 ] ~ [ linux-6.3.13 ] ~ [ linux-6.2.16 ] ~ [ linux-6.1.114 ] ~ [ linux-6.0.19 ] ~ [ linux-5.19.17 ] ~ [ linux-5.18.19 ] ~ [ linux-5.17.15 ] ~ [ linux-5.16.20 ] ~ [ linux-5.15.169 ] ~ [ linux-5.14.21 ] ~ [ linux-5.13.19 ] ~ [ linux-5.12.19 ] ~ [ linux-5.11.22 ] ~ [ linux-5.10.228 ] ~ [ linux-5.9.16 ] ~ [ linux-5.8.18 ] ~ [ linux-5.7.19 ] ~ [ linux-5.6.19 ] ~ [ linux-5.5.19 ] ~ [ linux-5.4.284 ] ~ [ linux-5.3.18 ] ~ [ linux-5.2.21 ] ~ [ linux-5.1.21 ] ~ [ linux-5.0.21 ] ~ [ linux-4.20.17 ] ~ [ linux-4.19.322 ] ~ [ linux-4.18.20 ] ~ [ linux-4.17.19 ] ~ [ linux-4.16.18 ] ~ [ linux-4.15.18 ] ~ [ linux-4.14.336 ] ~ [ linux-4.13.16 ] ~ [ linux-4.12.14 ] ~ [ linux-4.11.12 ] ~ [ linux-4.10.17 ] ~ [ linux-4.9.337 ] ~ [ linux-4.4.302 ] ~ [ linux-3.10.108 ] ~ [ linux-2.6.32.71 ] ~ [ linux-2.6.0 ] ~ [ linux-2.4.37.11 ] ~ [ unix-v6-master ] ~ [ ccs-tools-1.8.9 ] ~ [ policy-sample ] ~
Architecture: ~ [ i386 ] ~ [ alpha ] ~ [ m68k ] ~ [ mips ] ~ [ ppc ] ~ [ sparc ] ~ [ sparc64 ] ~

  1 .. SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
  2 
  3 Speculative Return Stack Overflow (SRSO)
  4 ========================================
  5 
  6 This is a mitigation for the speculative return stack overflow (SRSO)
  7 vulnerability found on AMD processors. The mechanism is by now the well
  8 known scenario of poisoning CPU functional units - the Branch Target
  9 Buffer (BTB) and Return Address Predictor (RAP) in this case - and then
 10 tricking the elevated privilege domain (the kernel) into leaking
 11 sensitive data.
 12 
 13 AMD CPUs predict RET instructions using a Return Address Predictor (aka
 14 Return Address Stack/Return Stack Buffer). In some cases, a non-architectural
 15 CALL instruction (i.e., an instruction predicted to be a CALL but is
 16 not actually a CALL) can create an entry in the RAP which may be used
 17 to predict the target of a subsequent RET instruction.
 18 
 19 The specific circumstances that lead to this varies by microarchitecture
 20 but the concern is that an attacker can mis-train the CPU BTB to predict
 21 non-architectural CALL instructions in kernel space and use this to
 22 control the speculative target of a subsequent kernel RET, potentially
 23 leading to information disclosure via a speculative side-channel.
 24 
 25 The issue is tracked under CVE-2023-20569.
 26 
 27 Affected processors
 28 -------------------
 29 
 30 AMD Zen, generations 1-4. That is, all families 0x17 and 0x19. Older
 31 processors have not been investigated.
 32 
 33 System information and options
 34 ------------------------------
 35 
 36 First of all, it is required that the latest microcode be loaded for
 37 mitigations to be effective.
 38 
 39 The sysfs file showing SRSO mitigation status is:
 40 
 41   /sys/devices/system/cpu/vulnerabilities/spec_rstack_overflow
 42 
 43 The possible values in this file are:
 44 
 45  * 'Not affected':
 46 
 47    The processor is not vulnerable
 48 
 49 * 'Vulnerable':
 50 
 51    The processor is vulnerable and no mitigations have been applied.
 52 
 53  * 'Vulnerable: No microcode':
 54 
 55    The processor is vulnerable, no microcode extending IBPB
 56    functionality to address the vulnerability has been applied.
 57 
 58  * 'Vulnerable: Safe RET, no microcode':
 59 
 60    The "Safe RET" mitigation (see below) has been applied to protect the
 61    kernel, but the IBPB-extending microcode has not been applied.  User
 62    space tasks may still be vulnerable.
 63 
 64  * 'Vulnerable: Microcode, no safe RET':
 65 
 66    Extended IBPB functionality microcode patch has been applied. It does
 67    not address User->Kernel and Guest->Host transitions protection but it
 68    does address User->User and VM->VM attack vectors.
 69 
 70    Note that User->User mitigation is controlled by how the IBPB aspect in
 71    the Spectre v2 mitigation is selected:
 72 
 73     * conditional IBPB:
 74 
 75       where each process can select whether it needs an IBPB issued
 76       around it PR_SPEC_DISABLE/_ENABLE etc, see :doc:`spectre`
 77 
 78     * strict:
 79 
 80       i.e., always on - by supplying spectre_v2_user=on on the kernel
 81       command line
 82 
 83    (spec_rstack_overflow=microcode)
 84 
 85  * 'Mitigation: Safe RET':
 86 
 87    Combined microcode/software mitigation. It complements the
 88    extended IBPB microcode patch functionality by addressing
 89    User->Kernel and Guest->Host transitions protection.
 90 
 91    Selected by default or by spec_rstack_overflow=safe-ret
 92 
 93  * 'Mitigation: IBPB':
 94 
 95    Similar protection as "safe RET" above but employs an IBPB barrier on
 96    privilege domain crossings (User->Kernel, Guest->Host).
 97 
 98   (spec_rstack_overflow=ibpb)
 99 
100  * 'Mitigation: IBPB on VMEXIT':
101 
102    Mitigation addressing the cloud provider scenario - the Guest->Host
103    transitions only.
104 
105    (spec_rstack_overflow=ibpb-vmexit)
106 
107 
108 
109 In order to exploit vulnerability, an attacker needs to:
110 
111  - gain local access on the machine
112 
113  - break kASLR
114 
115  - find gadgets in the running kernel in order to use them in the exploit
116 
117  - potentially create and pin an additional workload on the sibling
118    thread, depending on the microarchitecture (not necessary on fam 0x19)
119 
120  - run the exploit
121 
122 Considering the performance implications of each mitigation type, the
123 default one is 'Mitigation: safe RET' which should take care of most
124 attack vectors, including the local User->Kernel one.
125 
126 As always, the user is advised to keep her/his system up-to-date by
127 applying software updates regularly.
128 
129 The default setting will be reevaluated when needed and especially when
130 new attack vectors appear.
131 
132 As one can surmise, 'Mitigation: safe RET' does come at the cost of some
133 performance depending on the workload. If one trusts her/his userspace
134 and does not want to suffer the performance impact, one can always
135 disable the mitigation with spec_rstack_overflow=off.
136 
137 Similarly, 'Mitigation: IBPB' is another full mitigation type employing
138 an indirect branch prediction barrier after having applied the required
139 microcode patch for one's system. This mitigation comes also at
140 a performance cost.
141 
142 Mitigation: Safe RET
143 --------------------
144 
145 The mitigation works by ensuring all RET instructions speculate to
146 a controlled location, similar to how speculation is controlled in the
147 retpoline sequence.  To accomplish this, the __x86_return_thunk forces
148 the CPU to mispredict every function return using a 'safe return'
149 sequence.
150 
151 To ensure the safety of this mitigation, the kernel must ensure that the
152 safe return sequence is itself free from attacker interference.  In Zen3
153 and Zen4, this is accomplished by creating a BTB alias between the
154 untraining function srso_alias_untrain_ret() and the safe return
155 function srso_alias_safe_ret() which results in evicting a potentially
156 poisoned BTB entry and using that safe one for all function returns.
157 
158 In older Zen1 and Zen2, this is accomplished using a reinterpretation
159 technique similar to Retbleed one: srso_untrain_ret() and
160 srso_safe_ret().

~ [ source navigation ] ~ [ diff markup ] ~ [ identifier search ] ~

kernel.org | git.kernel.org | LWN.net | Project Home | SVN repository | Mail admin

Linux® is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds in the United States and other countries.
TOMOYO® is a registered trademark of NTT DATA CORPORATION.

sflogo.php