linux-kernel - Re: [RFC 00/10] Process-local memory allocations for hiding KVM secrets

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Date:   Thu, 13 Jun 2019 13:05:35 -0700
From:   Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@...el.com>
To:     Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
Cc:     Nadav Amit <namit@...are.com>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        Alexander Graf <graf@...zon.com>,
        Marius Hillenbrand <mhillenb@...zon.de>,
        kvm list <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Kernel Hardening <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>,
        Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>, Alexander Graf <graf@...zon.de>,
        David Woodhouse <dwmw@...zon.co.uk>,
        the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC 00/10] Process-local memory allocations for hiding KVM
 secrets

On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 10:49:42AM -0700, Dave Hansen wrote:
> On 6/13/19 10:29 AM, Nadav Amit wrote:
> > Having said that, I am not too excited to deal with this issue. Do
> > people still care about x86/32-bit?
> No, not really.

Especially not for KVM, given the number of times 32-bit KVM has been
broken recently without anyone noticing for several kernel releases.