Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2022 21:27:07 +0200
From: Salvatore Bonaccorso <>
	" security team" <>
Subject: Re: Xen Security Advisory 407 v1
 (CVE-2022-23816,CVE-2022-23825,CVE-2022-29900) - Retbleed - arbitrary
 speculative code execution with return instructions


On Tue, Jul 12, 2022 at 04:36:10PM +0000, security team wrote:
> Hash: SHA256
>  Xen Security Advisory CVE-2022-23816,CVE-2022-23825,CVE-2022-29900 / XSA-407
>    Retbleed - arbitrary speculative code execution with return instructions
> =================
> Researchers at ETH Zurich have discovered Retbleed, allowing for
> arbitrary speculative execution in a victim context.
> For more details, see:
> ETH Zurich have allocated CVE-2022-29900 for AMD and CVE-2022-29901 for
> Intel.
> Despite the similar preconditions, these are very different
> microarchitectural behaviours between vendors.
> On AMD CPUs, Retbleed is one specific instance of a more general
> microarchitectural behaviour called Branch Type Confusion.  AMD have
> assigned CVE-2022-23816 (Retbleed) and CVE-2022-23825 (Branch Type
> Confusion).
> For more details, see:

Is it confirmed that AMD is not using CVE-2022-29900? The above
amd-sb-1037 references as well both CVE-2022-23825 (Branch Type
Confusion) and CVE-2022-29900 (RETbleed), so I assume they agreed to
use CVE-2022-29900 for retbleed?

So should the Xen advisory as well use CVE-2022-23825,CVE-2022-29900
and CVE-2022-29901?


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.