From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: SYSRET 64-Bit Breakout
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2012 15:42:46 +0300
Message-ID: <4FD88AC6.3010407@redhat.com>
References: <CBFE4597.68DC%robert.clark@hp.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: "kvm@vger.kernel.org" <kvm@vger.kernel.org>
To: "Clark, Robert Graham" <robert.clark@hp.com>
Return-path: <kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:9237 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1752165Ab2FMMmv (ORCPT <rfc822;kvm@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 13 Jun 2012 08:42:51 -0400
In-Reply-To: <CBFE4597.68DC%robert.clark@hp.com>
Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <kvm.vger.kernel.org>

On 06/13/2012 03:26 PM, Clark, Robert Graham wrote:
> All,
> 
> I've been looking at http://www.kb.cert.org/vuls/id/649219
> 
> Xen appears to be vulnerable as do a number of other products. KVM isn't listed. Some discussion on IRC indicates that KVM isn't likely to be vulnerable.
> 
> Can anyone confirm please?

KVM is not vulnerable to this exploit.

-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function