From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:60651)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <ronniesahlberg@gmail.com>) id 1UhsiV-0008U8-Ap
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 29 May 2013 22:35:56 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <ronniesahlberg@gmail.com>) id 1UhsiQ-0006Dw-5K
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 29 May 2013 22:35:51 -0400
Received: from mail-wg0-x231.google.com ([2a00:1450:400c:c00::231]:65257)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <ronniesahlberg@gmail.com>) id 1UhsiP-0006Do-Vh
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 29 May 2013 22:35:46 -0400
Received: by mail-wg0-f49.google.com with SMTP id y10so6819510wgg.28
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Wed, 29 May 2013 19:35:44 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <51A62680.2000808@os.inf.tu-dresden.de>
References: <CAA2XHbf4zH-PR827Wwj9z-C-An0+7Ag8_muRS4zsRqVUo7Sb6Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<20130527093409.GH21969@stefanha-thinkpad.redhat.com>
	<CAA2XHbc=+OAAhjMPXDT6+PFVs+uSBN+ZVZHkEPZ-=Q_WtRYG4w@mail.gmail.com>
	<51A496C4.1020602@os.inf.tu-dresden.de>
	<87r4grca4p.fsf@codemonkey.ws> <20130528171742.GB30296@redhat.com>
	<20130529074929.GC20199@stefanha-thinkpad.redhat.com>
	<20130529090859.GH4472@redhat.com>
	<20130529142143.GA9545@stefanha-thinkpad.redhat.com>
	<51A62680.2000808@os.inf.tu-dresden.de>
Date: Wed, 29 May 2013 19:35:44 -0700
Message-ID: <CAN05THQN4SGZJUsZzO0mp3Qotj+CBROSd=uuibhXB=DuziDttA@mail.gmail.com>
From: ronnie sahlberg <ronniesahlberg@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] snabbswitch integration with QEMU for userspace
 ethernet I/O
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Julian Stecklina <jsteckli@os.inf.tu-dresden.de>
Cc: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@gmail.com>, "snabb-devel@googlegroups.com" <snabb-devel@googlegroups.com>, qemu-devel <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>, Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>, "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>

Julian,

Stefan's concerns are valid.

(Hopefully, kernel is harder to exploit and more carefully audited.)




On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 9:02 AM, Julian Stecklina
<jsteckli@os.inf.tu-dresden.de> wrote:
> On 05/29/2013 04:21 PM, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
>> The fact that a single switch process has shared memory access to all
>> guests' RAM is critical.  If the switch process is exploited, then that
>> exposes other guests' data!  (Think of a multi-tenant host with guests
>> belonging to different users.)
>
> True. But people don't mind having instruction decoding and half of
> virtio in the kernel these days, so it can't be that security critical...
>
> Julian
>