SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
posted by
martyb
on Saturday February 16 2019, @02:08PM
from the so-that-means...-we-are-screwed dept.
from the so-that-means...-we-are-screwed dept.
Google security researchers have come to the conclusion that speculative execution attacks are here to stay without drastic changes to modern CPU architectures, such as removing speculative execution entirely.
Spectre is here to stay: An analysis of side-channels and speculative execution
Related:
Patch for Intel Speculative Execution Vulnerability Could Reduce Performance by 5 to 35% [Update: 2]
Qualcomm Joins Others in Confirming its CPUs Suffer From Spectre, and Other Meltdown News
Congress Questions Chipmakers About Meltdown and Spectre
What Impact Has Meltdown/Spectre Had on YOUR Systems?
Intel Admits a Load of its CPUs Have Spectre V2 Flaw That Can't be Fixed
Intel FPU Speculation Vulnerability Confirmed
New Spectre Variant SpectreRSB Targets Return Stack Buffer
Intel Discloses a Speculative Execution Attack in Software Guard eXtensions (SGX)
Intel 'Gags' Linux Distros From Revealing Performance Hit From Spectre Patches
MIT Researchers Claim to Have a Solution for Some Speculative Execution Attacks
Spectre, Meltdown Researchers Unveil 7 More Speculative Execution Attacks
New Side-Channel Leak: Researchers Attack Operating System Page Caches
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Spectre is Here to Stay: An Analysis of Side-Channels and Speculative Execution
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 36 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Our business is run on trust. We trust you will pay in advance.
(Score: 2) by RS3 on Saturday February 16 2019, @05:16PM
The OS is supposed to "sandbox" user processes. That's been a big gripe of mine since 1990ish. Even generic Linux kernels don't do it properly, so we have "hypervisors" which are modified Linux kernels. Some hypervisors are forked Linux kernels, or written from scratch. The point is: IMHO ALL OSes should have hypervisor incorporated and hypervisors and OS "virtualization" (VMware, Xen, etc.) shouldn't be needed.
That said, for a hypervisor, or any software-based memory protection to work, the CPU _HAS_ to honor memory boundaries, regardless of cache or speculative execution.