Slashdot Mirror


'Kernel Memory Leaking' Intel Processor Design Flaw Forces Linux, Windows Redesign (theregister.co.uk)

According to The Register, "A fundamental design flaw in Intel's processor chips has forced a significant redesign of the Linux and Windows kernels to defang the chip-level security bug." From the report: Programmers are scrambling to overhaul the open-source Linux kernel's virtual memory system. Meanwhile, Microsoft is expected to publicly introduce the necessary changes to its Windows operating system in this month's Patch Tuesday: these changes were seeded to beta testers running fast-ring Windows Insider builds in November and December. Crucially, these updates to both Linux and Windows will incur a performance hit on Intel products. The effects are still being benchmarked, however we're looking at a ballpark figure of five to 30 per cent slow down, depending on the task and the processor model. More recent Intel chips have features -- specifically, PCID -- to reduce the performance hit. Similar operating systems, such as Apple's 64-bit macOS, will also need to be updated -- the flaw is in the Intel x86 hardware, and it appears a microcode update can't address it. It has to be fixed in software at the OS level, or buy a new processor without the design blunder. Details of the vulnerability within Intel's silicon are under wraps: an embargo on the specifics is due to lift early this month, perhaps in time for Microsoft's Patch Tuesday next week. Indeed, patches for the Linux kernel are available for all to see but comments in the source code have been redacted to obfuscate the issue. The report goes on to share some details of the flaw that have surfaced. "It is understood the bug is present in modern Intel processors produced in the past decade," reports The Register. "It allows normal user programs -- from database applications to JavaScript in web browsers -- to discern to some extent the contents of protected kernel memory. The fix is to separate the kernel's memory completely from user processes using what's called Kernel Page Table Isolation, or KPTI."

22 of 416 comments (clear)

  1. FOOF by OverlordQ · · Score: 5, Insightful

    About par for Intel's course. Make it fast at the expense of horrible bugs.

    --
    Your hair look like poop, Bob! - Wanker.
    1. Re:FOOF by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative
  2. This could be massive by Artem+S.+Tashkinov · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The developers behind the GRSecurity project measured up to 63% performance loss. If most common tasks are equally affected, Intel is sure fucked. Home users might not need to bother, but large cloud providers might be seriously affected.

    Meanwhile the Linux kernel has received the largest incremental minor patch in its history (229KiB) - perhaps kernel 4.14.11 already contains all the required fixes.

    I have a sneaking suspicion Intel shares will fall through the floor in the next few weeks because Intel CPUs might have suddenly become quite slower than their AMD Zen based counterparts.

    1. Re:This could be massive by Artem+S.+Tashkinov · · Score: 5, Informative

      Some PostgreSQL results have just been released: up to 23% performance loss. This is indeed huge.

    2. Re:This could be massive by scumdamn · · Score: 5, Informative

      Doesn't look like it's everybody. https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/12/...

  3. Re:How could this be abused? by OverlordQ · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You're running in EC2 on shared hardware. Your instance can read the memory of other instances running on the same physical hardware.

    --
    Your hair look like poop, Bob! - Wanker.
  4. Obligitory LWN link (Also affects ARM64) by sl3xd · · Score: 5, Informative

    Linux Weekly News has been covering this for quite a while.

    5% slowdown on average, with up to 30% for some particularly bad network operations.

    ARM64 is also affected, so it's not just intel

    --
    -- Sometimes you have to turn the lights off in order to see.
  5. Re:In all fairness... by scumdamn · · Score: 5, Informative

    Looks like you missed this commit from Tom Lendacky at AMD.

  6. And, time for AMD to shine again by NuclearCat · · Score: 5, Informative

    And what is interesting, AMD is immune to that, proof: https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/12/...

  7. Re:How could this be abused? by pereric · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Cryptographic keys, information on other processes (making other attacks feasible), perhaps random number generator seeds and status, for example ...
    And the principle in general that there could be information the process is not supposed to reach.

  8. AMD is safe by TeknoHog · · Score: 5, Informative

    The summary is not fully explicit: this is not a flaw in Intel x86 ISA, but specific to CPUs made by Intel. AMD processors don't have the problem, so they should not need the patch.

    https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/12/...

    This could be a huge win for AMD, because the patch incurs a measurable slowdown. At the moment, though, the Linux fix doesn't seem to distinguish between manufacturers. I expect the distinction will appear later -- better safe than sorry.

    --
    Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
  9. Re:How could this be abused? by EndlessNameless · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Private keys for system-level crypto and user credentials are stored in kernel space. You want everyone on the system to be reading those? If you can read a private key or a Kerberos token, you can become that daemon/system/user.

    This bug essentially destroys local security and severely compromises network security, subject to any limitations on where/when data can be read.

    I'm not a microarchitecture guru who can dig through the details and figure out the limitations of potential attacks. Perhaps only a small portion of kernel memory can be exposed via this bug. I don't really know. The naive, simple scenario where all kernel memory is exposed, though---that is pretty damned bad. Infosec doomsday bad.

    --

    ---
    According to the latest ruleset, this post should be modded as Vorpal Flamebait +5.
  10. Re:In all fairness... by sjames · · Score: 5, Insightful

    That bolster's AC's point. It looks like the Intel guys were going to cripple performance for everyone until the patch from AMD removed the unnecessary crippling from AMD processors.

  11. Intel CEO Sold a lot of stock... by Nos. · · Score: 5, Interesting

    https://www.fool.com/investing...

    Less than a month before we know the linux kernel was being patched for this bug.

    1. Re:Intel CEO Sold a lot of stock... by sl3xd · · Score: 5, Informative

      This bug has been known and reported about since early November; the original paper was presented in July of 2017, and code has been in Github since Feburary.

      Motley Fool is just noting that the Intel CEO isn't holding any more stock than he needs to.

      And there are good reasons:

      * AMD is back from the dead.
      * Intel's GPU hasn't been that successful -- they've even teamed up with AMD to put Radeon GPU's in the same die as an Intel CPU.
      * PC sales are declining as consumers shift from Intel PC's to using ARM-powered tablets & phones instead.
      * ARM is making inroads into the "desktop and laptop computer" marketplace.
      * ARM is powering most consumer electronics as well (TV's, Blu-ray players, Smart Speakers, etc)
      * Intel is absolutely nowhere in the mobile world. Mobile has one ARM to rule them all.
      * Intel missed the boat for the current generation of XBOX and PlayStation consoles.

      Intel is looking more and more like a one trick pony, and its competitors are beginning to do that one trick better too.

      --
      -- Sometimes you have to turn the lights off in order to see.
  12. ... and this is why ... by nbvb · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This is why we run our mission critical workloads on SPARC and Power along side Linux. Solaris and AIX. Diversity -- in operating system, in processor, in manufacturer - is healthy. The SPARC T8's are blazing faster, secure, and don't have this nonsense. Neither do our POWER8's. Having all your eggs in the Intel+Linux basket could be a major shitshow here... meanwhile, we'll keep chugging along.

  13. Re:In all fairness... by sexconker · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Well, I'm guessing the approach was more along the lines of "an abundance of caution with the X86 ISA" as opposed to deliberate malice towards AMD.

    Hi. Have you met Intel?

  14. Re:Don't know if serious. by Hal_Porter · · Score: 5, Funny

    https://www.mail-archive.com/l...

    2) Namespace

          Several people including Linus requested to change the KAISER name.

          We came up with a list of technically correct acronyms:

              User Address Space Separation, prefix uass_

              Forcefully Unmap Complete Kernel With Interrupt Trampolines, prefix fuckwit_

          but we are politically correct people so we settled for

            Kernel Page Table Isolation, prefix kpti_

          Linus, your call :)

    LOL!

    --
    echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
  15. Re:five to 30 per cent slow down by grimr · · Score: 5, Informative

    I don't think you understand how drastic this fix is. Every time a user mode to kernel mode transition happens and every time a hardware interrupt happens, the entire page table directory layout has to be switched. This means all the TLB caches are flushed as well and that's where the main performance hit comes from.

    So if you're doing something like crypto currency mining you're not going to see much of a hit. But if you're doing a lot of I/O (file servers, database servers, web servers, etc.) you're going to see that 25-35% performance hit.

    And that's why hardware bugs are so serious. Sometimes you get lucky and it's a microcode update with no penalty. Sometimes it's a simple fix with barely any performance penalty. But sometimes you get unlucky and the fix hurts a lot and the only way to get the performance back is to swap out the hardware.

  16. Re:Go ARM Go by andydread · · Score: 5, Informative

    really sorry to bust your ARM bubble. https://lwn.net/Articles/74039...

  17. Speculative Memory References and Page Faults by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 5, Interesting

    From the AMD commit:

    AMD processors are not subject to the types of attacks that the kernel
    page table isolation feature protects against. The AMD microarchitecture
    does not allow memory references, including speculative references, that
    access higher privileged data when running in a lesser privileged mode
    when that access would result in a page fault.

    this can probably be rewritten in the inverse like:

    Intel processors ... allow memory references, including speculative references, that
    access higher privileged data when running in a lesser privileged mode, [including]
    when that access would result in a page fault.

    So it seems like: set up a speculative memory reference to a kernel memory structure, cause a page fault, and then get a bit of kernel memory out (and back in?). That could get you root before long. Some people have been saying this can be leveraged to get a guest into its hypervisor too.

    --
    My God, it's Full of Source!
    OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  18. Re:In all fairness... by scumdamn · · Score: 5, Informative

    I'm saying that Intel tried to cripple all processors but the dude from AMD told him their products weren't vulnerable and didn't need to be slowed down.