93 lines
		
	
	
		
			2.9 KiB
		
	
	
	
		
			ReStructuredText
		
	
	
	
	
	
			
		
		
	
	
			93 lines
		
	
	
		
			2.9 KiB
		
	
	
	
		
			ReStructuredText
		
	
	
	
	
	
| ===========
 | |
| Speculation
 | |
| ===========
 | |
| 
 | |
| This document explains potential effects of speculation, and how undesirable
 | |
| effects can be mitigated portably using common APIs.
 | |
| 
 | |
| ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 | |
| 
 | |
| To improve performance and minimize average latencies, many contemporary CPUs
 | |
| employ speculative execution techniques such as branch prediction, performing
 | |
| work which may be discarded at a later stage.
 | |
| 
 | |
| Typically speculative execution cannot be observed from architectural state,
 | |
| such as the contents of registers. However, in some cases it is possible to
 | |
| observe its impact on microarchitectural state, such as the presence or
 | |
| absence of data in caches. Such state may form side-channels which can be
 | |
| observed to extract secret information.
 | |
| 
 | |
| For example, in the presence of branch prediction, it is possible for bounds
 | |
| checks to be ignored by code which is speculatively executed. Consider the
 | |
| following code::
 | |
| 
 | |
| 	int load_array(int *array, unsigned int index)
 | |
| 	{
 | |
| 		if (index >= MAX_ARRAY_ELEMS)
 | |
| 			return 0;
 | |
| 		else
 | |
| 			return array[index];
 | |
| 	}
 | |
| 
 | |
| Which, on arm64, may be compiled to an assembly sequence such as::
 | |
| 
 | |
| 	CMP	<index>, #MAX_ARRAY_ELEMS
 | |
| 	B.LT	less
 | |
| 	MOV	<returnval>, #0
 | |
| 	RET
 | |
|   less:
 | |
| 	LDR	<returnval>, [<array>, <index>]
 | |
| 	RET
 | |
| 
 | |
| It is possible that a CPU mis-predicts the conditional branch, and
 | |
| speculatively loads array[index], even if index >= MAX_ARRAY_ELEMS. This
 | |
| value will subsequently be discarded, but the speculated load may affect
 | |
| microarchitectural state which can be subsequently measured.
 | |
| 
 | |
| More complex sequences involving multiple dependent memory accesses may
 | |
| result in sensitive information being leaked. Consider the following
 | |
| code, building on the prior example::
 | |
| 
 | |
| 	int load_dependent_arrays(int *arr1, int *arr2, int index)
 | |
| 	{
 | |
| 		int val1, val2,
 | |
| 
 | |
| 		val1 = load_array(arr1, index);
 | |
| 		val2 = load_array(arr2, val1);
 | |
| 
 | |
| 		return val2;
 | |
| 	}
 | |
| 
 | |
| Under speculation, the first call to load_array() may return the value
 | |
| of an out-of-bounds address, while the second call will influence
 | |
| microarchitectural state dependent on this value. This may provide an
 | |
| arbitrary read primitive.
 | |
| 
 | |
| ====================================
 | |
| Mitigating speculation side-channels
 | |
| ====================================
 | |
| 
 | |
| The kernel provides a generic API to ensure that bounds checks are
 | |
| respected even under speculation. Architectures which are affected by
 | |
| speculation-based side-channels are expected to implement these
 | |
| primitives.
 | |
| 
 | |
| The array_index_nospec() helper in <linux/nospec.h> can be used to
 | |
| prevent information from being leaked via side-channels.
 | |
| 
 | |
| A call to array_index_nospec(index, size) returns a sanitized index
 | |
| value that is bounded to [0, size) even under cpu speculation
 | |
| conditions.
 | |
| 
 | |
| This can be used to protect the earlier load_array() example::
 | |
| 
 | |
| 	int load_array(int *array, unsigned int index)
 | |
| 	{
 | |
| 		if (index >= MAX_ARRAY_ELEMS)
 | |
| 			return 0;
 | |
| 		else {
 | |
| 			index = array_index_nospec(index, MAX_ARRAY_ELEMS);
 | |
| 			return array[index];
 | |
| 		}
 | |
| 	}
 |