News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Downfall Attacks by bhk on Tuesday August 08, 2023 @04:54PM (#37055313)
Once you "dedicate cores to specific VMs" you will find that chip designers can also screw that up, just like they can screw up protection within a core. So you might as well proclaim that "impossible to get right" preemptively.
Re:Downfall Attacks by quickthrower2 on Tuesday August 08, 2023 @06:33PM (#37056380)
They said physical processor. I took this to mean chip. Of course you can't trust chips on the same mother board (there could be a bug where they can read the same memory), so you need a network boundary. So different rack on the server, for each [boundary, however you define that...]
Re:Downfall Attacks by bhk on Tuesday August 08, 2023 @09:18PM (#37057634)
They said physical processor core, and elsewhere just core. That does not mean chip.
Re:Downfall Attacks by bhk on Tuesday August 08, 2023 @09:37PM (#37057752)
Regarding VM/core/chip/motherboard boundaries ...

A number of vexing CPU security vulnerabilities have resulted from a general class of optimizations that share cache resources (memory, TLBs, branch prediction tables, etc.) across different domains, which enables cross-domain attacks.

There is a potential for vulnerabilities even when the domains are separated by a network boundary ... if those domains view the world through some shared cache at the network layer.