![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
Arnd Bergmann wrote: >> It can shoot not only its foot, but anything the monitor's uid has >> access to. Host files, the host network, other guests belonging to the >> user, etc. >> > > Yes, that's what I meant. It's obviously nicer if the guest can't do that, > but it's a tradeoff of the potential security impact against on how hard > it is to implement hiding the addresses you don't want your guest to see. > To put it into other words, do you want the optimal performance, or the > optimal security? > > Well, isolation is one of the most significant features of full virtualization, both for security and reliability. I don't think we can compromise that. >> It's worse than I thouht: tlb entries generated by guest accesses are >> tagged with the guest virtual address, to if you remove a guest >> physical/host virtual page you need to invalidate the entire guest tlb. >> > > Ok, so it's the HW's fault. They either copied bad or decided doing the > s390 approach was too expensive. > x86 tradition is to make all possible mistakes before getting a working solution. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2006-10-29 09:17 [W:0.623 / U:0.150 seconds] ©2003-2008 Jasper Spaans | |||||||||||||