| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20150106014718.GA23775@node.dhcp.inet.fi> Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2015 03:47:18 +0200 From: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name> To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net> Cc: One Thousand Gnomes <gnomes@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>, Mark Seaborn <mseaborn@...omium.org>, kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: DRAM unreliable under specific access patern On Mon, Jan 05, 2015 at 11:50:04AM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 11:23 AM, One Thousand Gnomes > <gnomes@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk> wrote: > >> In the meantime, I created test that actually uses physical memory, > >> 8MB apart, as described in some footnote. It is attached. It should > >> work, but it needs boot with specific config options and specific > >> kernel parameters. > > > > Why not just use hugepages. You know the alignment guarantees for 1GB > > pages and that means you don't even need to be root > > > > In fact - should we be disabling 1GB huge page support by default at this > > point, at least on non ECC boxes ? > > Can you actually damage anyone else's data using a 1 GB hugepage? hugetlbfs is a filesystem: the answer is yes. Although I don't see the issue as a big attach vector. -- Kirill A. Shutemov -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists