tid-103
Vulnerability from emb3d
Type
hardware
Link
Show details on source website
Description

Operating system memory safety models rely on processor hardware to enforce separation between different virtual memory spaces. Failures of processor architectures to properly deliver these security guarantees can lead to sensitive information being disclosed across the boundaries between different kernel and process memory spaces. The performance optimization features in modern processors have been shown to be a source of such data leakage vulnerabilities. Data leakage through timing-based side channels introduced by the behavior of processor features such as memory caches have long been known to be effective against cryptographic implementations. The Spectre and Meltdown vulnerabilities announced in 2018 brought attention to weaknesses in certain microarchitectural performance features that could be manipulated in conjunction with memory cache timing techniques to leak data across OS virtual memory bounds. Spectre / Meltdown, and subsequent research work, demonstrated that speculative execution features (e.g., branch prediction, speculative memory loads/stores, out-of-order execution, etc.) could lead to memory locations being read into the CPU’s cache in violation of virtual memory permissions. Malicious code could then utilize a subsequent cache timing side channel attack to extract the data stored in those memory locations.

CWE
  • CWE-1037: Processor Optimization Removal or Modification of Security-critical Code
  • CWE-1264: Hardware Logic with Insecure De-Synchronization between Control and Data Channels


Log in or create an account to share your comment.




Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.




Sightings

Author Source Type Date

Nomenclature

  • Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or observed by the user.
  • Confirmed: The vulnerability has been validated from an analyst's perspective.
  • Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
  • Exploited: The vulnerability was observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Patched: The vulnerability was observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Not exploited: The vulnerability was not observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Not confirmed: The user expressed doubt about the validity of the vulnerability.
  • Not patched: The vulnerability was not observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.



Detection rules are retrieved from Rulezet.