From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.linutronix.de (146.0.238.70:993) by crypto-ml.lab.linutronix.de with IMAP4-SSL for ; 06 Mar 2019 16:19:12 -0000 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]) by Galois.linutronix.de with esmtps (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA256:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1h1ZGB-0007gP-5F for speck@linutronix.de; Wed, 06 Mar 2019 17:19:11 +0100 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BA251C04B31A for ; Wed, 6 Mar 2019 16:19:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from tonnant.bos.jonmasters.org (ovpn-121-197.rdu2.redhat.com [10.10.121.197]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9B141600C5 for ; Wed, 6 Mar 2019 16:19:03 +0000 (UTC) References: <6012d57e-2d94-c82f-72a2-bd64dde65a85@citrix.com> From: Jon Masters Message-ID: <66c92dab-7e37-74ba-eecb-2e445baee0ba@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2019 11:18:56 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <6012d57e-2d94-c82f-72a2-bd64dde65a85@citrix.com> Subject: [MODERATED] Encrypted Message Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="RyetsGQjJDAXI4U3uGFhrHAQj17jVX6Hc"; protected-headers="v1" To: speck@linutronix.de List-ID: This is an OpenPGP/MIME encrypted message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --RyetsGQjJDAXI4U3uGFhrHAQj17jVX6Hc Content-Type: text/rfc822-headers; protected-headers="v1" Content-Disposition: inline From: Jon Masters To: speck for Andrew Cooper Subject: Re: Starting to go public? --RyetsGQjJDAXI4U3uGFhrHAQj17jVX6Hc Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 3/5/19 5:31 PM, speck for Andrew Cooper wrote: > On 05/03/2019 20:36, speck for Jiri Kosina wrote: >> On Tue, 5 Mar 2019, speck for Andrew Cooper wrote: >> >>>> Looks like the papers are starting to leak: >>>> >>>> https://arxiv.org/pdf/1903.00446.pdf >>>> >>>> yes, yes, a lot of the attack seems to be about rowhammer, but the >>>> "spolier" part looks like MDS. >>> So Intel was aware of that paper, but wasn't expecting it to go publi= c >>> today. >>> >>> =3D46rom their point of view, it is a traditional timing sidechannel = on a >>> piece of the pipeline (which happens to be component which exists for= >>> speculative memory disambiguation). >>> >>> There are no proposed changes to the MDS timeline at this point. >> So this is not the paper that caused the panic fearing that PSF might = leak=20 >> earlier than the rest of the issues in mid-february (which few days la= ter=20 >> Intel claimed to have succesfully negotiated with the researches not t= o=20 >> publish before the CRD)? >=20 > Correct. >=20 > The incident you are referring to is a researcher who definitely found > PSF, contacted Intel and was initially displeased at the proposed embar= go. Indeed. There are at least three different teams with papers that read on MDS, and all of them are holding to the embargo. Jon. --=20 Computer Architect | Sent with my Fedora powered laptop --RyetsGQjJDAXI4U3uGFhrHAQj17jVX6Hc--