>When it comes to Meltdown:
>Does OpenBSD is going to release patches for 6.2? I don't see anything related
>to Meltdown in errata, but maybe it is too early. I understand other OSes
>received disclosed information about bug a few months earlier.
amd64 snapshots contain a fix, which is undergoing
Intel provided stable microcode for Skylake mitigating Spectre variant 2.
Current status
https://newsroom.intel.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/11/2018/02/microcode-update-guidance.pdf
When it comes to Meltdown:
Does OpenBSD is going to release patches for 6.2? I don't see anything related
to
Excuse me, I can support the far-seeing generalities in the message you
linked but am confused about the specifics. It looks like processor hangs,
and deadlock, and poorly documented page table handling by the MMU, are
concrete issues specified.
Respectfully: Are there any direct links to
10 years passed, Theo de Raadt:
https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-misc=118296441702631
_
Zbyszek Żółkiewski
>
> https://spectreattack.com/
>
There are some claims about Raspberry Pi:
Here you go:
We do not believe any generation of Raspberry Pi hardware
is susceptible to either the Spectre or Meltdown vulnerabilities.
https://twitter.com/EbenUpton/status/948999181309530116
Why Raspberry Pi isn’t vulnerable to Spectre or Meltdown
> Ted Unangst wrote:
> > Otto Moerbeek wrote:
> > > Sparc64 and powerpc also have speculative execution, branch
> > > prediction and extensive caches. It is much wiser to assume they are
> > > also affected by (similar) bugs/explots or whatever you call it.
> >
> > A lot of the commonly available
Ted Unangst wrote:
> Otto Moerbeek wrote:
> > Sparc64 and powerpc also have speculative execution, branch
> > prediction and extensive caches. It is much wiser to assume they are
> > also affected by (similar) bugs/explots or whatever you call it.
>
> A lot of the commonly available sparc64 gear,
Otto Moerbeek wrote:
> Sparc64 and powerpc also have speculative execution, branch
> prediction and extensive caches. It is much wiser to assume they are
> also affected by (similar) bugs/explots or whatever you call it.
A lot of the commonly available sparc64 gear, T2 and USIII, are in order.
>>So I will be most interested to see the OpenBSD take on this after the
>> embargo period is over.
>How long is embargo period?
apparently Intel were aware of one of issues as early as Late June
Last year... and
late july for another issue ...
it will be interesting how quickly a handful of
Fair enough, any idea if this could effect MIPS {32 64}? That's my next
most commonly deployed arch. I do assume that there will likely be some
issues on other arches, but from what I see, folks are still doing
pensive beard stroking trying to determine if AMD chips are susceptible.
SPARC is
On Sat, Jan 06, 2018 at 10:22:25AM -0800, Jordan Geoghegan wrote:
> All my web-facing servers are running SPARC and/or for a couple smaller
> projects, PowerPC. People thought I was a loon when I vehemently insisted on
> SPARC over the years, and called me crazy when I hosted my personal web
>
All my web-facing servers are running SPARC and/or for a couple smaller
projects, PowerPC. People thought I was a loon when I vehemently
insisted on SPARC over the years, and called me crazy when I hosted my
personal web projects on PowerPC. x86 is a disease.
A little bit extra in electricity
Yes! They are also working on risc-v.
Sent from ProtonMail Mobile
On Fri, Jan 5, 2018 at 19:50, ropers wrote:
> On 4 January 2018 at 09:13, Rupert Gallagher wrote:
>
>> The Chinese have an interesting project on RISC, who is taking ages to hit
>> the
http://www.mcst.ru/
On Sat, Jan 6, 2018 at 08:05, Jordan Geoghegan wrote:
> They make their own via the /Moscow Center of SPARC Technologies./ Check out
> the Elbrus architecture, its pretty clever. It can run native SPARC binaries
> and also has a fairly efficient x86
- Original message -
On 05/01/18 08:51, Eric Furman wrote:
> I always love threads like this. :)
> Doesn't it tell anybody anything that none of the developers have commented?
My point was that this thread was just pointless speculation
by a bunch of people who have no idea of what they
> So I will be most interested to see the OpenBSD take on this after the
> embargo period is over.
How long is embargo period?
On 05/01/18 08:51, Eric Furman wrote:
> I always love threads like this. :)
> Doesn't it tell anybody anything that none of the developers have commented?
>
Ignorant speculation: has pledge as revealed the severity of these bugs ?
They make their own via the /Moscow Center of SPARC Technologies./
Check out the Elbrus architecture, its pretty clever. It can run native
SPARC binaries and also has a fairly efficient x86 compatibility layer
built into the hardware. The way they achieve bi-endian capability is
pretty neat,
On Saturday, 6 January 2018, Eric Furman wrote:
> I always love threads like this. :)
> Doesn't it tell anybody anything that none of the developers have
> commented?
>
>
Theo talked about how scary some bugs in some Intel CPU’s were, a decade
ago...
On Fri, 5 Jan 2018 00:58:33 -
"torsten" wrote:
> What surprises me is the "panic" publication of this because of already known
> and in *BSDs addressed concerns about hyper threatening and shared memory
> well back since 1994
IMHO this is a "zero day panic" of
On 4 January 2018 at 09:13, Rupert Gallagher wrote:
> The Chinese have an interesting project on RISC, who is taking ages to hit
> the market.
>
Is that https://www.openbsd.org/loongson.html or are you referring to
something else?
t;> -Original Message-
>>>> From: owner-m...@openbsd.org [mailto:owner-m...@openbsd.org] On
>Behalf
>>>> Of torsten
>>>> Sent: 05 January 2018 00:59
>>>> To: 'Rupert Gallagher'; 'Daniel Wilkins'; 'Allan Streib'
>>>> Cc: 'A
page=1
-Original Message-
From: owner-m...@openbsd.org [mailto:owner-m...@openbsd.org] On Behalf
Of torsten
Sent: 05 January 2018 00:59
To: 'Rupert Gallagher'; 'Daniel Wilkins'; 'Allan Streib'
Cc: 'Alceu R. de Freitas Jr.'; misc@openbsd.org
Subject: Re: Kernel memory leaking on Intel CPUs?
I wond
Yes, it is open hardware. No, it is not COTS, unfortunately. Low cost is due to
high volume, and SPARC is hard to find.
On Fri, Jan 5, 2018 at 06:36, SJP Lists wrote:
> SPARC architecture is open to others to develop their own CPU designs. The
> Russians are not forced
The answer is: genuine FUD. The news is hitting the media with more emphasis
than a North Corean nuclear test, the uncertainty is due to yet another
hardware feature that was implemented by Intel to steal secrets across
different OSs, and the doubt of whether OBSD will pass this new test.
On
I always love threads like this. :)
Doesn't it tell anybody anything that none of the developers have commented?
?
Thanks,
> Subject: Kernel memory leaking on Intel CPUs?
> https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/01/02/intel_cpu_design_flaw/
>
> "It is understood the bug is present in modern Intel processors produced in
> the past decade. It allows normal user programs – from d
lan Streib'
> > Cc: 'Alceu R. de Freitas Jr.'; misc@openbsd.org
> > Subject: Re: Kernel memory leaking on Intel CPUs?
> >
> > I wonder how it is in reality for most *BSD users due to 1. hide
> > processes run by other users 2. disable reading kernel messaging
> >
On Friday, 5 January 2018, Rupert Gallagher wrote:
> The Intel flop hits the US .mil as well, because they depend on COTS
> Xeons.
>
> I pity the Russians. I wonder if they pay through the nose for Oracle's
> power hungry hardware, or make it cheaper and power efficient of
sd.org] On Behalf
> Of torsten
> Sent: 05 January 2018 00:59
> To: 'Rupert Gallagher'; 'Daniel Wilkins'; 'Allan Streib'
> Cc: 'Alceu R. de Freitas Jr.'; misc@openbsd.org
> Subject: Re: Kernel memory leaking on Intel CPUs?
>
> I wonder how it is in reality for most *BSD users
ilkins; Allan Streib
> Cc: Alceu R. de Freitas Jr.; misc@openbsd.org
> Subject: Re: Kernel memory leaking on Intel CPUs?
>
> https://mobile.twitter.com/misc0110/status/948706387491786752
>
> On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 16:49, Daniel Wilkins <t...@parlementum.net>
> wrote:
https://mobile.twitter.com/misc0110/status/948706387491786752
On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 16:49, Daniel Wilkins wrote:
> Intel's said that it affects every processor in the last 20+ years and that
> it's "not a big deal for most users" because it's only a kernel memory
>
The Intel flop hits the US .mil as well, because they depend on COTS Xeons.
I pity the Russians. I wonder if they pay through the nose for Oracle's power
hungry hardware, or make it cheaper and power efficient of their own.
On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 18:28, Jordan Geoghegan
On 1/4/2018 10:51 AM, Daniel Boyd wrote:
>
> AMD has said that it doesn't affect their processors. Whether or not
> that's true, I'm not sure.
>
> One curiosity I had was whether the KARL mitigation in 6.2 would help
> with this. I suppose it depends on the nature of the flaw (which is
> still
On Thu, 2018-01-04 at 10:21 -0500, Allan Streib wrote:
> "Alceu R. de Freitas Jr." writes:
>
> > I guess Intel does not give a shit about non-profit groups. Linux
> > got
> > this attention because there are a lot of players making money from
> > it, players that surely
The Russians heavily use SPARC for aerospace/military applications as
well as their in house domestic-use-only Elbrus machines, for what I
imagine to be reasons precisely like this.
On 01/04/18 00:13, Rupert Gallagher wrote:
Everybody is reading about it, including people like me that have
On Thu, 2018-01-04 at 10:49 -0500, Daniel Wilkins wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 04, 2018 at 10:21:12AM -0500, Allan Streib wrote:
> > "Alceu R. de Freitas Jr." writes:
> >
> > > I guess Intel does not give a shit about non-profit groups. Linux
> > > got
> > > this attention
On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 10:49 AM, Daniel Wilkins wrote:
> From what I understand, AMD has come out and explicitly said that their
> architecture isn't and has never been vulnerable, while Intel's said that
> it affects every processor in the last 20+ years and that it's "not
On Thu, Jan 04, 2018 at 10:21:12AM -0500, Allan Streib wrote:
> "Alceu R. de Freitas Jr." writes:
>
> > I guess Intel does not give a shit about non-profit groups. Linux got
> > this attention because there are a lot of players making money from
> > it, players that
Hello Daniel,
I don't know as Im not a core developer... the Vuln was embargoed so my guess
is a lot of people were in the dark.
Thanks
Tom Smyth
On 4 January 2018 at 13:31, Daniel Boyd wrote:
> On Jan 4, 2018, at 5:43 AM, Tom Smyth
"Alceu R. de Freitas Jr." writes:
> I guess Intel does not give a shit about non-profit groups. Linux got
> this attention because there are a lot of players making money from
> it, players that surely have some sort of partnership with Intel.
>From what I have read in
Not that I was able to see.
I guess Intel does not give a shit about non-profit groups. Linux got this
attention because there are a lot of players making money from it, players that
surely have some sort of partnership with Intel.
Around 2003, when I was still in college, I went to a IBM talk
Everybody is reading about it, including people like me that have formerly
underestimated the problem... mea culpa
The question is, can we have a kernel free of patches for spynet cpus? The
Russians are moving to ARM-based cpus, anthough ARM is subject to UK-style
Orwellian spynet law. The
On Jan 4, 2018, at 5:43 AM, Tom Smyth wrote:
>
> sorry all,
>
> I had posted to the tech mailing list about this .. I came across these 2
> papers and they may be of interest about the CPU Security flaws
>
> https://spectreattack.com/
>
> I hope this helps
> Tom
sorry all,
I had posted to the tech mailing list about this .. I came across these 2
papers and they may be of interest about the CPU Security flaws
https://spectreattack.com/
I hope this helps
Tom Smyth
Intel is probably waiting for Microsoft, Red Hat,
Apple and major cloud companies to update
OSes until release of Intel Security Advisory.
I am also curious does OpenBSD also maps
kernel to userspace memory of processes?
Could pledge protect against some scenarios
exploiting these kinds of bugs?
I was just about to ask about the same thing... will OpenBSD lose performance
as well, given the security flaw conditions?Looks like an issue already for
Linux, MS Windows and MacOSX.Didn't see any mention about *BSD on the article
too...
Em quarta-feira, 3 de janeiro de 2018 11:03:00
https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/01/02/intel_cpu_design_flaw/ "It is
understood the bug is present in modern Intel processors produced in the
past decade. It allows normal user programs – from database applications
to JavaScript in web browsers – to discern to some extent the layout or
contents
48 matches
Mail list logo