From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-qt0-x243.google.com (mail-qt0-x243.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c0d::243]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8EA883B2A4 for ; Thu, 4 Jan 2018 16:47:52 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-qt0-x243.google.com with SMTP id 33so3625331qtv.1 for ; Thu, 04 Jan 2018 13:47:52 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=5Gt0PS0IKJ/Zrxmu7NnVqp/NvsQZRxwlQLVPlxwgO6o=; b=Q5lPQfGm5fdpttx5XNFZH5szvNaS/gw0UNCmFHiOz/j9M8VtEGeMXvKVxlw765PBFV 4Ml7372Npd85d7cYj5qPIl8JKMSijdErd4xFBs9W0/bznUpULrl33XPPafbTvoNyrQQs 9AsT4H3BZ9DoxHfKUyMo/+1O0kTem9hgGqcAGIEL/ayoisTmA4e8guN5FZUXTRTlZLGM yqumC9a0tLQPzMnlrft69pY56YM9HQZbFNLXcMvJVBrt3ZUI+2fkDL7GHZwcyrx/lHl5 sczckgmNd8xnnA9BKSF1Qfu8M4/AISC4e1hz6mi1CDkVMgycw02U2l7sKGEYIf5FLO2N r3Qw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=5Gt0PS0IKJ/Zrxmu7NnVqp/NvsQZRxwlQLVPlxwgO6o=; b=n8s1/ktqgyEqamtx/fD7HjMBpPlEiYpQmCclWU2xdRymicr4MlJEYnGfHaJJfSdSKV Yak5NnzfJwPxWaCwlrk2I9HsoTY30k5nK3C1/F0ltQQI+TtCsSiUckAgl7WBm6UMLIU9 3k9R959XCk73+vhA6XmxFJcjg++e2jebw4EztKQRCPZU/tv0stFPZqRE1RSghxKO/Ibx jf7mioMQw/3yMNhBdkCTuh5S+8EhP89n86wBN8PHd4RXekpL6DQctbdRp5UPNtJC9gwq a1NJqDKjx6Daw+AV7qLisJFxYwTAz1PlHvxjF5pobQYZMJsBz9S2wOSH1FczfHoqyR+c 6uBw== X-Gm-Message-State: AKwxytfiSdDAwpMOrvesVu/mKMvLeHOxsAevWfYhzbj397M0059wI2oV R5WyukQO8NSqq+yimi9XWbTKZempZgNM6oqG+W8= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACJfBoudObMCSPCDKA0T/MS8pD052GYmzAnLTQMy+tp1eqH09PkadHokuZGWmsgQ2pUNRdAe8rU6i63r94kCkGfgDVY= X-Received: by 10.200.36.221 with SMTP id t29mr1388764qtt.141.1515102472253; Thu, 04 Jan 2018 13:47:52 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.12.193.93 with HTTP; Thu, 4 Jan 2018 13:47:51 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: From: Dave Taht Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2018 13:47:51 -0800 Message-ID: To: =?UTF-8?Q?Joel_Wir=C4=81mu_Pauling?= Cc: Jonathan Morton , cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] KASLR: Do we have to worry about other arches than x86? X-BeenThere: cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: Development issues regarding the cerowrt test router project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 04 Jan 2018 21:47:52 -0000 On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 1:44 PM, Joel Wir=C4=81mu Pauling wrote: > > > On 5 January 2018 at 01:09, Jonathan Morton wrote= : >> >> >> >> I don't think we need to worry about it too much in a router context. >> Virtual server folks, OTOH... >> >> - Jonathan Morton >> > Disagree - The Router is pretty much synonymous with NFV > > ; I run my lede instances at home on hypervisors - and this is definitely > the norm in Datacentres now. We need to work through this quite carefully= . Yes, the NFV case is serious and what I concluded we had most to worry about - before starting to worry about the lower end router chips themselves. But I wasn't aware that people were actually trying to run lede in that, I'd kind of expected a more server-like distro to be used there. Why lede in a NFV? Ease of configuration? Reduced attack surface? (hah) The only x86 chip I use (aside from simulations) is the AMD one in the apu2, which I don't know enough about as per speculation... --=20 Dave T=C3=A4ht CEO, TekLibre, LLC http://www.teklibre.com Tel: 1-669-226-2619