Adding upstream version 5.10.209.upstream/5.10.209

Signed-off-by: Daniel Baumann <daniel.baumann@progress-linux.org>

1 files changed, 133 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/Documentation/admin-guide/hw-vuln/srso.rst b/Documentation/admin-guide/hw-vuln/srso.rst
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..f79cb11b0
--- /dev/null
+++ b/Documentation/admin-guide/hw-vuln/srso.rst
@@ -0,0 +1,133 @@
+.. SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
+
+Speculative Return Stack Overflow (SRSO)
+========================================
+
+This is a mitigation for the speculative return stack overflow (SRSO)
+vulnerability found on AMD processors. The mechanism is by now the well
+known scenario of poisoning CPU functional units - the Branch Target
+Buffer (BTB) and Return Address Predictor (RAP) in this case - and then
+tricking the elevated privilege domain (the kernel) into leaking
+sensitive data.
+
+AMD CPUs predict RET instructions using a Return Address Predictor (aka
+Return Address Stack/Return Stack Buffer). In some cases, a non-architectural
+CALL instruction (i.e., an instruction predicted to be a CALL but is
+not actually a CALL) can create an entry in the RAP which may be used
+to predict the target of a subsequent RET instruction.
+
+The specific circumstances that lead to this varies by microarchitecture
+but the concern is that an attacker can mis-train the CPU BTB to predict
+non-architectural CALL instructions in kernel space and use this to
+control the speculative target of a subsequent kernel RET, potentially
+leading to information disclosure via a speculative side-channel.
+
+The issue is tracked under CVE-2023-20569.
+
+Affected processors
+-------------------
+
+AMD Zen, generations 1-4. That is, all families 0x17 and 0x19. Older
+processors have not been investigated.
+
+System information and options
+------------------------------
+
+First of all, it is required that the latest microcode be loaded for
+mitigations to be effective.
+
+The sysfs file showing SRSO mitigation status is:
+
+  /sys/devices/system/cpu/vulnerabilities/spec_rstack_overflow
+
+The possible values in this file are:
+
+ - 'Not affected'               The processor is not vulnerable
+
+ - 'Vulnerable: no microcode'   The processor is vulnerable, no
+                                microcode extending IBPB functionality
+                                to address the vulnerability has been
+                                applied.
+
+ - 'Mitigation: microcode'      Extended IBPB functionality microcode
+                                patch has been applied. It does not
+                                address User->Kernel and Guest->Host
+                                transitions protection but it does
+                                address User->User and VM->VM attack
+                                vectors.
+
+                                (spec_rstack_overflow=microcode)
+
+ - 'Mitigation: safe RET'       Software-only mitigation. It complements
+                                the extended IBPB microcode patch
+                                functionality by addressing User->Kernel
+                                and Guest->Host transitions protection.
+
+                                Selected by default or by
+                                spec_rstack_overflow=safe-ret
+
+ - 'Mitigation: IBPB'           Similar protection as "safe RET" above
+                                but employs an IBPB barrier on privilege
+                                domain crossings (User->Kernel,
+                                Guest->Host).
+
+                                (spec_rstack_overflow=ibpb)
+
+ - 'Mitigation: IBPB on VMEXIT' Mitigation addressing the cloud provider
+                                scenario - the Guest->Host transitions
+                                only.
+
+                                (spec_rstack_overflow=ibpb-vmexit)
+
+In order to exploit vulnerability, an attacker needs to:
+
+ - gain local access on the machine
+
+ - break kASLR
+
+ - find gadgets in the running kernel in order to use them in the exploit
+
+ - potentially create and pin an additional workload on the sibling
+   thread, depending on the microarchitecture (not necessary on fam 0x19)
+
+ - run the exploit
+
+Considering the performance implications of each mitigation type, the
+default one is 'Mitigation: safe RET' which should take care of most
+attack vectors, including the local User->Kernel one.
+
+As always, the user is advised to keep her/his system up-to-date by
+applying software updates regularly.
+
+The default setting will be reevaluated when needed and especially when
+new attack vectors appear.
+
+As one can surmise, 'Mitigation: safe RET' does come at the cost of some
+performance depending on the workload. If one trusts her/his userspace
+and does not want to suffer the performance impact, one can always
+disable the mitigation with spec_rstack_overflow=off.
+
+Similarly, 'Mitigation: IBPB' is another full mitigation type employing
+an indrect branch prediction barrier after having applied the required
+microcode patch for one's system. This mitigation comes also at
+a performance cost.
+
+Mitigation: safe RET
+--------------------
+
+The mitigation works by ensuring all RET instructions speculate to
+a controlled location, similar to how speculation is controlled in the
+retpoline sequence.  To accomplish this, the __x86_return_thunk forces
+the CPU to mispredict every function return using a 'safe return'
+sequence.
+
+To ensure the safety of this mitigation, the kernel must ensure that the
+safe return sequence is itself free from attacker interference.  In Zen3
+and Zen4, this is accomplished by creating a BTB alias between the
+untraining function srso_alias_untrain_ret() and the safe return
+function srso_alias_safe_ret() which results in evicting a potentially
+poisoned BTB entry and using that safe one for all function returns.
+
+In older Zen1 and Zen2, this is accomplished using a reinterpretation
+technique similar to Retbleed one: srso_untrain_ret() and
+srso_safe_ret().