Re: Linux guest kernel threat model for Confidential Computing

On Wed, Jan 25, 2023 at 03:29:07PM +0000, Reshetova, Elena wrote:
> Replying only to the not-so-far addressed points. 
> 
> > On Wed, Jan 25, 2023 at 12:28:13PM +0000, Reshetova, Elena wrote:
> > > Hi Greg,

<...>

> > > 3) All the tools are open-source and everyone can start using them right away
> > even
> > > without any special HW (readme has description of what is needed).
> > > Tools and documentation is here:
> > > https://github.com/intel/ccc-linux-guest-hardening
> > 
> > Again, as our documentation states, when you submit patches based on
> > these tools, you HAVE TO document that.  Otherwise we think you all are
> > crazy and will get your patches rejected.  You all know this, why ignore
> > it?
> 
> Sorry, I didn’t know that for every bug that is found in linux kernel when
> we are submitting a fix that we have to list the way how it has been found.
> We will fix this in the future submissions, but some bugs we have are found by
> plain code audit, so 'human' is the tool. 

My problem with that statement is that by applying different threat
model you "invent" bugs which didn't exist in a first place.

For example, in this [1] latest submission, authors labeled correct
behaviour as "bug".

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/

Thanks