5.15-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
------------------
From: Pawan Gupta pawan.kumar.gupta@linux.intel.com
commit 1ac116ce6468670eeda39345a5585df308243dca upstream.
Add the admin-guide for Indirect Target Selection (ITS).
Signed-off-by: Pawan Gupta pawan.kumar.gupta@linux.intel.com Signed-off-by: Dave Hansen dave.hansen@linux.intel.com Reviewed-by: Josh Poimboeuf jpoimboe@kernel.org Reviewed-by: Alexandre Chartre alexandre.chartre@oracle.com Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman gregkh@linuxfoundation.org --- Documentation/admin-guide/hw-vuln/index.rst | 1 Documentation/admin-guide/hw-vuln/indirect-target-selection.rst | 156 ++++++++++ 2 files changed, 157 insertions(+)
--- a/Documentation/admin-guide/hw-vuln/index.rst +++ b/Documentation/admin-guide/hw-vuln/index.rst @@ -22,3 +22,4 @@ are configurable at compile, boot or run gather_data_sampling.rst srso reg-file-data-sampling + indirect-target-selection --- /dev/null +++ b/Documentation/admin-guide/hw-vuln/indirect-target-selection.rst @@ -0,0 +1,156 @@ +.. SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 + +Indirect Target Selection (ITS) +=============================== + +ITS is a vulnerability in some Intel CPUs that support Enhanced IBRS and were +released before Alder Lake. ITS may allow an attacker to control the prediction +of indirect branches and RETs located in the lower half of a cacheline. + +ITS is assigned CVE-2024-28956 with a CVSS score of 4.7 (Medium). + +Scope of Impact +--------------- +- **eIBRS Guest/Host Isolation**: Indirect branches in KVM/kernel may still be + predicted with unintended target corresponding to a branch in the guest. + +- **Intra-Mode BTI**: In-kernel training such as through cBPF or other native + gadgets. + +- **Indirect Branch Prediction Barrier (IBPB)**: After an IBPB, indirect + branches may still be predicted with targets corresponding to direct branches + executed prior to the IBPB. This is fixed by the IPU 2025.1 microcode, which + should be available via distro updates. Alternatively microcode can be + obtained from Intel's github repository [#f1]_. + +Affected CPUs +------------- +Below is the list of ITS affected CPUs [#f2]_ [#f3]_: + + ======================== ============ ==================== =============== + Common name Family_Model eIBRS Intra-mode BTI + Guest/Host Isolation + ======================== ============ ==================== =============== + SKYLAKE_X (step >= 6) 06_55H Affected Affected + ICELAKE_X 06_6AH Not affected Affected + ICELAKE_D 06_6CH Not affected Affected + ICELAKE_L 06_7EH Not affected Affected + TIGERLAKE_L 06_8CH Not affected Affected + TIGERLAKE 06_8DH Not affected Affected + KABYLAKE_L (step >= 12) 06_8EH Affected Affected + KABYLAKE (step >= 13) 06_9EH Affected Affected + COMETLAKE 06_A5H Affected Affected + COMETLAKE_L 06_A6H Affected Affected + ROCKETLAKE 06_A7H Not affected Affected + ======================== ============ ==================== =============== + +- All affected CPUs enumerate Enhanced IBRS feature. +- IBPB isolation is affected on all ITS affected CPUs, and need a microcode + update for mitigation. +- None of the affected CPUs enumerate BHI_CTRL which was introduced in Golden + Cove (Alder Lake and Sapphire Rapids). This can help guests to determine the + host's affected status. +- Intel Atom CPUs are not affected by ITS. + +Mitigation +---------- +As only the indirect branches and RETs that have their last byte of instruction +in the lower half of the cacheline are vulnerable to ITS, the basic idea behind +the mitigation is to not allow indirect branches in the lower half. + +This is achieved by relying on existing retpoline support in the kernel, and in +compilers. ITS-vulnerable retpoline sites are runtime patched to point to newly +added ITS-safe thunks. These safe thunks consists of indirect branch in the +second half of the cacheline. Not all retpoline sites are patched to thunks, if +a retpoline site is evaluated to be ITS-safe, it is replaced with an inline +indirect branch. + +Dynamic thunks +~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ +From a dynamically allocated pool of safe-thunks, each vulnerable site is +replaced with a new thunk, such that they get a unique address. This could +improve the branch prediction accuracy. Also, it is a defense-in-depth measure +against aliasing. + +Note, for simplicity, indirect branches in eBPF programs are always replaced +with a jump to a static thunk in __x86_indirect_its_thunk_array. If required, +in future this can be changed to use dynamic thunks. + +All vulnerable RETs are replaced with a static thunk, they do not use dynamic +thunks. This is because RETs get their prediction from RSB mostly that does not +depend on source address. RETs that underflow RSB may benefit from dynamic +thunks. But, RETs significantly outnumber indirect branches, and any benefit +from a unique source address could be outweighed by the increased icache +footprint and iTLB pressure. + +Retpoline +~~~~~~~~~ +Retpoline sequence also mitigates ITS-unsafe indirect branches. For this +reason, when retpoline is enabled, ITS mitigation only relocates the RETs to +safe thunks. Unless user requested the RSB-stuffing mitigation. + +Mitigation in guests +^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ +All guests deploy ITS mitigation by default, irrespective of eIBRS enumeration +and Family/Model of the guest. This is because eIBRS feature could be hidden +from a guest. One exception to this is when a guest enumerates BHI_DIS_S, which +indicates that the guest is running on an unaffected host. + +To prevent guests from unnecessarily deploying the mitigation on unaffected +platforms, Intel has defined ITS_NO bit(62) in MSR IA32_ARCH_CAPABILITIES. When +a guest sees this bit set, it should not enumerate the ITS bug. Note, this bit +is not set by any hardware, but is **intended for VMMs to synthesize** it for +guests as per the host's affected status. + +Mitigation options +^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ +The ITS mitigation can be controlled using the "indirect_target_selection" +kernel parameter. The available options are: + + ======== =================================================================== + on (default) Deploy the "Aligned branch/return thunks" mitigation. + If spectre_v2 mitigation enables retpoline, aligned-thunks are only + deployed for the affected RET instructions. Retpoline mitigates + indirect branches. + + off Disable ITS mitigation. + + vmexit Equivalent to "=on" if the CPU is affected by guest/host isolation + part of ITS. Otherwise, mitigation is not deployed. This option is + useful when host userspace is not in the threat model, and only + attacks from guest to host are considered. + + force Force the ITS bug and deploy the default mitigation. + ======== =================================================================== + +Sysfs reporting +--------------- + +The sysfs file showing ITS mitigation status is: + + /sys/devices/system/cpu/vulnerabilities/indirect_target_selection + +Note, microcode mitigation status is not reported in this file. + +The possible values in this file are: + +.. list-table:: + + * - Not affected + - The processor is not vulnerable. + * - Vulnerable + - System is vulnerable and no mitigation has been applied. + * - Vulnerable, KVM: Not affected + - System is vulnerable to intra-mode BTI, but not affected by eIBRS + guest/host isolation. + * - Mitigation: Aligned branch/return thunks + - The mitigation is enabled, affected indirect branches and RETs are + relocated to safe thunks. + +References +---------- +.. [#f1] Microcode repository - https://github.com/intel/Intel-Linux-Processor-Microcode-Data-Files + +.. [#f2] Affected Processors list - https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/developer/topic-technology/software-... + +.. [#f3] Affected Processors list (machine readable) - https://github.com/intel/Intel-affected-processor-list