From owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jun 13 22:37:26 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C14F1065673 for ; Wed, 13 Jun 2012 22:37:26 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from glewis@eyesbeyond.com) Received: from misty.eyesbeyond.com (gerbercreations.com [71.39.140.16]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F103C8FC20 for ; Wed, 13 Jun 2012 22:37:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from misty.eyesbeyond.com (localhost.eyesbeyond.com [127.0.0.1]) by misty.eyesbeyond.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q5DMbwQM072829 for ; Wed, 13 Jun 2012 15:37:59 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from glewis@eyesbeyond.com) Received: (from glewis@localhost) by misty.eyesbeyond.com (8.14.5/8.14.5/Submit) id q5DMbwUw072828 for freebsd-security@freebsd.org; Wed, 13 Jun 2012 15:37:58 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from glewis@eyesbeyond.com) X-Authentication-Warning: misty.eyesbeyond.com: glewis set sender to glewis@eyesbeyond.com using -f Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2012 15:37:58 -0700 From: Greg Lewis To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20120613223758.GA72817@misty.eyesbeyond.com> References: <201206121326.q5CDQXca078536@freefall.freebsd.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <201206121326.q5CDQXca078536@freefall.freebsd.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Subject: Re: FreeBSD Security Advisory FreeBSD-SA-12:04.sysret X-BeenThere: freebsd-security@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Security issues \[members-only posting\]" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2012 22:37:26 -0000 On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 01:26:33PM +0000, FreeBSD Security Advisories wrote: > IV. Workaround > > No workaround is available. > > However FreeBSD/amd64 running on AMD CPUs is not vulnerable to this > particular problem. > > Systems with 64 bit capable CPUs, but running the 32 bit FreeBSD/i386 > kernel are not vulnerable, nor are systems running on different > processor architectures. I found these last two paragraphs a little confusing. Is the correct interpretation that FreeBSD/amd64 running on Intel CPUs is the vulnerable combination? -- Greg Lewis Email : glewis@eyesbeyond.com Eyes Beyond Web : http://www.eyesbeyond.com Information Technology FreeBSD : glewis@FreeBSD.org