| 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/admin-guide/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/admin-guide/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. | 
 |  | 
 |   full,nosmt	The same as mds=full, with SMT disabled on vulnerable | 
 | 		CPUs.  This is the complete mitigation. | 
 |  | 
 |   off		Disables MDS mitigations completely. | 
 |  | 
 |   ============  ============================================================= | 
 |  | 
 | Not specifying this option is equivalent to "mds=full". For processors | 
 | that are affected by both TAA (TSX Asynchronous Abort) and MDS, | 
 | specifying just "mds=off" without an accompanying "tsx_async_abort=off" | 
 | will have no effect as the same mitigation is used for both | 
 | vulnerabilities. | 
 |  | 
 | 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/admin-guide/hw-vuln//l1tf.rst <default_mitigations>`. |