On Thu, Jan 04, 2018 at 09:56:46AM -0800, Tim Chen wrote: > From: David Woodhouse <d...@amazon.co.uk> > > We are impervious to the indirect branch prediction attack with retpoline > but firmware won't be, so we still need to set IBRS to protect > firmware code execution when calling into firmware at runtime.
Wait, what? Maybe it's just the wine from dinner talking, but if the firmware has issues, we have bigger things to worry about here, right? It already handed over the "chain of trust" to us, so we have already implicitly trusted that the firmware was correct here. So why do we need to do anything about firmware calls in this manner? Or am I totally missing something else here? thanks, greg k-h
