| MDS - Microarchitectural Data Sampling |
| ====================================== |
| |
| Microarchitectural Data Sampling is a hardware vulnerability which allows |
| unprivileged speculative access to data which is available in various CPU |
| internal buffers. |
| |
| Affected processors |
| ------------------- |
| |
| This vulnerability affects a wide range of Intel processors. The |
| vulnerability is not present on: |
| |
| - Processors from AMD, Centaur and other non Intel vendors |
| |
| - Older processor models, where the CPU family is < 6 |
| |
| - Some Atoms (Bonnell, Saltwell, Goldmont, GoldmontPlus) |
| |
| - Intel processors which have the ARCH_CAP_MDS_NO bit set in the |
| IA32_ARCH_CAPABILITIES MSR. |
| |
| Whether a processor is affected or not can be read out from the MDS |
| vulnerability file in sysfs. See :ref:`mds_sys_info`. |
| |
| Not all processors are affected by all variants of MDS, but the mitigation |
| is identical for all of them so the kernel treats them as a single |
| vulnerability. |
| |
| Related CVEs |
| ------------ |
| |
| The following CVE entries are related to the MDS vulnerability: |
| |
| ============== ===== =================================================== |
| CVE-2018-12126 MSBDS Microarchitectural Store Buffer Data Sampling |
| CVE-2018-12130 MFBDS Microarchitectural Fill Buffer Data Sampling |
| CVE-2018-12127 MLPDS Microarchitectural Load Port Data Sampling |
| CVE-2019-11091 MDSUM Microarchitectural Data Sampling Uncacheable Memory |
| ============== ===== =================================================== |
| |
| Problem |
| ------- |
| |
| When performing store, load, L1 refill operations, processors write data |
| into temporary microarchitectural structures (buffers). The data in the |
| buffer can be forwarded to load operations as an optimization. |
| |
| Under certain conditions, usually a fault/assist caused by a load |
| operation, data unrelated to the load memory address can be speculatively |
| forwarded from the buffers. Because the load operation causes a fault or |
| assist and its result will be discarded, the forwarded data will not cause |
| incorrect program execution or state changes. But a malicious operation |
| may be able to forward this speculative data to a disclosure gadget which |
| allows in turn to infer the value via a cache side channel attack. |
| |
| Because the buffers are potentially shared between Hyper-Threads cross |
| Hyper-Thread attacks are possible. |
| |
| Deeper technical information is available in the MDS specific x86 |
| architecture section: :ref:`Documentation/x86/mds.rst <mds>`. |
| |
| |
| Attack scenarios |
| ---------------- |
| |
| Attacks against the MDS vulnerabilities can be mounted from malicious non |
| priviledged user space applications running on hosts or guest. Malicious |
| guest OSes can obviously mount attacks as well. |
| |
| Contrary to other speculation based vulnerabilities the MDS vulnerability |
| does not allow the attacker to control the memory target address. As a |
| consequence the attacks are purely sampling based, but as demonstrated with |
| the TLBleed attack samples can be postprocessed successfully. |
| |
| Web-Browsers |
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^ |
| |
| It's unclear whether attacks through Web-Browsers are possible at |
| all. The exploitation through Java-Script is considered very unlikely, |
| but other widely used web technologies like Webassembly could possibly be |
| abused. |
| |
| |
| .. _mds_sys_info: |
| |
| MDS system information |
| ----------------------- |
| |
| The Linux kernel provides a sysfs interface to enumerate the current MDS |
| status of the system: whether the system is vulnerable, and which |
| mitigations are active. The relevant sysfs file is: |
| |
| /sys/devices/system/cpu/vulnerabilities/mds |
| |
| The possible values in this file are: |
| |
| .. list-table:: |
| |
| * - 'Not affected' |
| - The processor is not vulnerable |
| * - 'Vulnerable' |
| - The processor is vulnerable, but no mitigation enabled |
| * - 'Vulnerable: Clear CPU buffers attempted, no microcode' |
| - The processor is vulnerable but microcode is not updated. |
| |
| The mitigation is enabled on a best effort basis. See :ref:`vmwerv` |
| * - 'Mitigation: Clear CPU buffers' |
| - The processor is vulnerable and the CPU buffer clearing mitigation is |
| enabled. |
| |
| If the processor is vulnerable then the following information is appended |
| to the above information: |
| |
| ======================== ============================================ |
| 'SMT vulnerable' SMT is enabled |
| 'SMT mitigated' SMT is enabled and mitigated |
| 'SMT disabled' SMT is disabled |
| 'SMT Host state unknown' Kernel runs in a VM, Host SMT state unknown |
| ======================== ============================================ |
| |
| .. _vmwerv: |
| |
| Best effort mitigation mode |
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ |
| |
| If the processor is vulnerable, but the availability of the microcode based |
| mitigation mechanism is not advertised via CPUID the kernel selects a best |
| effort mitigation mode. This mode invokes the mitigation instructions |
| without a guarantee that they clear the CPU buffers. |
| |
| This is done to address virtualization scenarios where the host has the |
| microcode update applied, but the hypervisor is not yet updated to expose |
| the CPUID to the guest. If the host has updated microcode the protection |
| takes effect otherwise a few cpu cycles are wasted pointlessly. |
| |
| The state in the mds sysfs file reflects this situation accordingly. |
| |
| |
| Mitigation mechanism |
| ------------------------- |
| |
| The kernel detects the affected CPUs and the presence of the microcode |
| which is required. |
| |
| If a CPU is affected and the microcode is available, then the kernel |
| enables the mitigation by default. The mitigation can be controlled at boot |
| time via a kernel command line option. See |
| :ref:`mds_mitigation_control_command_line`. |
| |
| .. _cpu_buffer_clear: |
| |
| CPU buffer clearing |
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ |
| |
| The mitigation for MDS clears the affected CPU buffers on return to user |
| space and when entering a guest. |
| |
| If SMT is enabled it also clears the buffers on idle entry when the CPU |
| is only affected by MSBDS and not any other MDS variant, because the |
| other variants cannot be protected against cross Hyper-Thread attacks. |
| |
| For CPUs which are only affected by MSBDS the user space, guest and idle |
| transition mitigations are sufficient and SMT is not affected. |
| |
| .. _virt_mechanism: |
| |
| Virtualization mitigation |
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ |
| |
| The protection for host to guest transition depends on the L1TF |
| vulnerability of the CPU: |
| |
| - CPU is affected by L1TF: |
| |
| If the L1D flush mitigation is enabled and up to date microcode is |
| available, the L1D flush mitigation is automatically protecting the |
| guest transition. |
| |
| If the L1D flush mitigation is disabled then the MDS mitigation is |
| invoked explicit when the host MDS mitigation is enabled. |
| |
| For details on L1TF and virtualization see: |
| :ref:`Documentation/hw-vuln//l1tf.rst <mitigation_control_kvm>`. |
| |
| - CPU is not affected by L1TF: |
| |
| CPU buffers are flushed before entering the guest when the host MDS |
| mitigation is enabled. |
| |
| The resulting MDS protection matrix for the host to guest transition: |
| |
| ============ ===== ============= ============ ================= |
| L1TF MDS VMX-L1FLUSH Host MDS MDS-State |
| |
| Don't care No Don't care N/A Not affected |
| |
| Yes Yes Disabled Off Vulnerable |
| |
| Yes Yes Disabled Full Mitigated |
| |
| Yes Yes Enabled Don't care Mitigated |
| |
| No Yes N/A Off Vulnerable |
| |
| No Yes N/A Full Mitigated |
| ============ ===== ============= ============ ================= |
| |
| This only covers the host to guest transition, i.e. prevents leakage from |
| host to guest, but does not protect the guest internally. Guests need to |
| have their own protections. |
| |
| .. _xeon_phi: |
| |
| XEON PHI specific considerations |
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ |
| |
| The XEON PHI processor family is affected by MSBDS which can be exploited |
| cross Hyper-Threads when entering idle states. Some XEON PHI variants allow |
| to use MWAIT in user space (Ring 3) which opens an potential attack vector |
| for malicious user space. The exposure can be disabled on the kernel |
| command line with the 'ring3mwait=disable' command line option. |
| |
| XEON PHI is not affected by the other MDS variants and MSBDS is mitigated |
| before the CPU enters a idle state. As XEON PHI is not affected by L1TF |
| either disabling SMT is not required for full protection. |
| |
| .. _mds_smt_control: |
| |
| SMT control |
| ^^^^^^^^^^^ |
| |
| All MDS variants except MSBDS can be attacked cross Hyper-Threads. That |
| means on CPUs which are affected by MFBDS or MLPDS it is necessary to |
| disable SMT for full protection. These are most of the affected CPUs; the |
| exception is XEON PHI, see :ref:`xeon_phi`. |
| |
| Disabling SMT can have a significant performance impact, but the impact |
| depends on the type of workloads. |
| |
| See the relevant chapter in the L1TF mitigation documentation for details: |
| :ref:`Documentation/hw-vuln/l1tf.rst <smt_control>`. |
| |
| |
| .. _mds_mitigation_control_command_line: |
| |
| Mitigation control on the kernel command line |
| --------------------------------------------- |
| |
| The kernel command line allows to control the MDS mitigations at boot |
| time with the option "mds=". The valid arguments for this option are: |
| |
| ============ ============================================================= |
| full If the CPU is vulnerable, enable all available mitigations |
| for the MDS vulnerability, CPU buffer clearing on exit to |
| userspace and when entering a VM. Idle transitions are |
| protected as well if SMT is enabled. |
| |
| It does not automatically disable SMT. |
| |
| off Disables MDS mitigations completely. |
| |
| ============ ============================================================= |
| |
| Not specifying this option is equivalent to "mds=full". |
| |
| |
| Mitigation selection guide |
| -------------------------- |
| |
| 1. Trusted userspace |
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ |
| |
| If all userspace applications are from a trusted source and do not |
| execute untrusted code which is supplied externally, then the mitigation |
| can be disabled. |
| |
| |
| 2. Virtualization with trusted guests |
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ |
| |
| The same considerations as above versus trusted user space apply. |
| |
| 3. Virtualization with untrusted guests |
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ |
| |
| The protection depends on the state of the L1TF mitigations. |
| See :ref:`virt_mechanism`. |
| |
| If the MDS mitigation is enabled and SMT is disabled, guest to host and |
| guest to guest attacks are prevented. |
| |
| .. _mds_default_mitigations: |
| |
| Default mitigations |
| ------------------- |
| |
| The kernel default mitigations for vulnerable processors are: |
| |
| - Enable CPU buffer clearing |
| |
| The kernel does not by default enforce the disabling of SMT, which leaves |
| SMT systems vulnerable when running untrusted code. The same rationale as |
| for L1TF applies. |
| See :ref:`Documentation/hw-vuln//l1tf.rst <default_mitigations>`. |