Date: Sat, 21 May 2005 22:14:06 -0700 From: Colin Percival <cperciva@freebsd.org> To: Sam Lawrance <boris@brooknet.com.au> Cc: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Scheduler fixes for hyperthreading Message-ID: <4290151E.9020508@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <1116738628.867.33.camel@dirk.no.domain> References: <428FC00B.3080909@freebsd.org> <aef05e1ae6104223181ad3cf03e11390@xcllnt.net> <428FD710.4060200@freebsd.org> <9e8314b53980a379445cc8c07086901d@xcllnt.net> <428FE788.8020408@freebsd.org> <42900C01.10904@freebsd.org> <429012D3.6070803@freebsd.org> <1116738628.867.33.camel@dirk.no.domain>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Sam Lawrance wrote: > On Sat, 2005-05-21 at 22:04 -0700, Colin Percival wrote: >>Sam Lawrance wrote: >>>I'm just curious here... would the mac_seeotheruids policy help in >>>obscuring the value of any information collected by a spy process? >> >>Yes. It would mean that the spy could steal an SSL certificate, but >>not know whose SSL certificate it was. :-) > > Can the spy be sure that it's not just stealing fortunes though? > > I mean for example, can the cache timings shown on page 7 of your paper > be used to reliably identify what the other thread on the CPU is? Yes. The patterns are very distinctive. Colin Percival
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4290151E.9020508>