Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2016 23:19:38 +0300
From: Billy Brumley <>
To: Roman Drahtmueller <>
Subject: Re: CVE-2016-2178: OpenSSL DSA follows a non-constant
 time codepath for certain operations

> The paper very resourceful, and thank you for sharing your thoughts
> even beyond it!

My pleasure :)

> Control over CPU utilization (and thereby cache eviction) can be achieved
> by a remote attacker: Web applications are influenced remotely by
> definition, and they are far from slim or localized these days.
> Keepalives allow to keep the system in a sling with predictable resource
> utilization including cache fills, as there is not only just data stuffed
> through some buffers.
> The question remains if the deterioration of the SNR (*) leaves enough
> resolution to be useful. This would no longer constitute a cache-based
> attack with the terrifyingly clear signal, but the sharp edges in the
> latency that you have demonstrated may contribute to filtering the effect
> from the noise.
> While the cause - non-constant-time implementation - remains.

What you are saying is all valid on paper. But when you move to the
uarch level, the techniques we are using are very specific --- rdtsc
and clflush instructions, paired with targeted malicious performance
degradation techniques. When you take away these tools, it really
complicates things for an attacker.

> Are the orders of magnitude in range?

This is more of an interesting research question that would take maybe
six months to definitively answer.


Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Please check out the Open Source Software Security Wiki, which is counterpart to this mailing list.

Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.