linux-kernel - Re: Software based ECC ?

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <E1INYht-0000Xw-Ay@be1.lrz>
Date:	Tue, 21 Aug 2007 20:44:01 +0200
From:	Bodo Eggert <7eggert@....de>
To:	Folkert van Heusden <folkert@...heusden.com>,
	Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu, roland <devzero@....de>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Software based ECC ?

Folkert van Heusden <folkert@...heusden.com> wrote:

>> > http://pdos.csail.mit.edu/papers/softecc:ddopson-meng
softecc_ddopson-meng.pdf
>> > "SoftECC : A System for Software Memory Integrity Checking"
>> 
>> Personally, I'd recommend just shelling out the bucks for hardware ECC if
>> the reliability matters.
> 
> a question and an idea: Q: is ecc guaranteed to detect all bitflips?

It's guaranteed not to.

Having n extra bits, you can detect n-bit-flips and correct n/2-bit-flips
(provided you use an optimal code).

These extra bits can flip, too, so if you have m >= 1 data bits and any
finite number n of extra bits, it's possible to have an undetectable
n+1-bit-flip.
-- 
If you can't remember, then the claymore IS pointed at you. 

Friß, Spammer: W@...be.7eggert.dyndns.org k@...eggert.dyndns.org
 Rtc@...q.7eggert.dyndns.org 9qKSiPo@...Tis.7eggert.dyndns.org
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/