Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH v33 11/21] x86/sgx: Linux Enclave Driver | Date | Tue, 01 Sep 2020 22:06:32 -0500 | From | "Haitao Huang" <> |
| |
On Fri, 03 Jul 2020 22:31:10 -0500, Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 01, 2020 at 08:59:02PM -0700, Sean Christopherson wrote: >> On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 01:08:33AM +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: >> > +static int sgx_validate_secs(const struct sgx_secs *secs, >> > + unsigned long ssaframesize) >> > +{ >> > + if (secs->size < (2 * PAGE_SIZE) || !is_power_of_2(secs->size)) >> > + return -EINVAL; >> > + >> > + if (secs->base & (secs->size - 1)) >> > + return -EINVAL; >> > + >> > + if (secs->miscselect & sgx_misc_reserved_mask || >> > + secs->attributes & sgx_attributes_reserved_mask || >> > + secs->xfrm & sgx_xfrm_reserved_mask) >> > + return -EINVAL; >> > + >> > + if (secs->attributes & SGX_ATTR_MODE64BIT) { >> > + if (secs->size > sgx_encl_size_max_64) >> > + return -EINVAL; >> > + } else if (secs->size > sgx_encl_size_max_32) >> > + return -EINVAL; >> >> These should be >=, not >, the SDM uses one of those fancy ≥ ligatures. >> >> Internal versions use more obvious pseudocode, e.g.: >> >> if ((DS:TMP_SECS.ATTRIBUTES.MODE64BIT = 1) AND >> (DS:TMP_SECS.SIZE AND (~((1 << CPUID.18.0:EDX[15:8]) – 1))) >> { >> #GP(0); > > Updated as: > > static int sgx_validate_secs(const struct sgx_secs *secs) > { > u64 max_size = (secs->attributes & SGX_ATTR_MODE64BIT) ? > sgx_encl_size_max_64 : sgx_encl_size_max_32; > > if (secs->size < (2 * PAGE_SIZE) || !is_power_of_2(secs->size)) > return -EINVAL; > > if (secs->base & (secs->size - 1)) > return -EINVAL; > > if (secs->miscselect & sgx_misc_reserved_mask || > secs->attributes & sgx_attributes_reserved_mask || > secs->xfrm & sgx_xfrm_reserved_mask) > return -EINVAL; > > if (secs->size >= max_size) > return -EINVAL; >
This should be > not >=. Issue raised and fixed by Fábio Silva for ported patches for OOT SGX support: https://github.com/intel/SGXDataCenterAttestationPrimitives/pull/123
I tested and verified with Intel arch, the comparison indeed should be >.
Thanks Haitao
| |