Anthony Liguori <anth...@codemonkey.ws> writes: > Gerd Hoffmann <kra...@redhat.com> writes: > >> On 05/29/13 01:53, Kevin O'Connor wrote: >>> On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 03:41:32PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: >>>> Juan is not available now, and Anthony asked for >>>> agenda to be sent early. >>>> So here comes: >>>> >>>> Agenda for the meeting Tue, May 28: >>>> >>>> - Generating acpi tables >>> >>> I didn't see any meeting notes, but I thought it would be worthwhile >>> to summarize the call. This is from memory so correct me if I got >>> anything wrong. >>> >>> Anthony believes that the generation of ACPI tables is the task of the >>> firmware. Reasons cited include security implications of running more >>> code in qemu vs the guest context, >> >> I fail to see the security issues here. It's not like the apci table >> generation code operates on untrusted input from the guest ... > > But possibly untrusted input from a malicious user. You can imagine > something like a IaaS provider that let's a user input arbitrary values > for memory, number of nics, etc. > > It's a stretch of an example, I agree, but the general principle I think > is sound: we should push as much work as possible to the least > privileged part of the stack. In this case, firmware has much less > privileges than QEMU.
Firmware runs in a primitive, unforgiving environment, and should do as little as humanly possible. For an instructive example of deviating from that rule, check out UEFI. [...] -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
