From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:45558)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <mst@redhat.com>) id 1Uhwl6-0007NK-Rw
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 30 May 2013 02:54:55 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <mst@redhat.com>) id 1Uhwl0-0006dx-Pz
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 30 May 2013 02:54:48 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:40473)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <mst@redhat.com>) id 1Uhwl0-0006dq-HO
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 30 May 2013 02:54:42 -0400
Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 09:55:05 +0300
From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <20130530065504.GA10405@redhat.com>
References: <20130527093409.GH21969@stefanha-thinkpad.redhat.com>
	<CAA2XHbc=+OAAhjMPXDT6+PFVs+uSBN+ZVZHkEPZ-=Q_WtRYG4w@mail.gmail.com>
	<51A496C4.1020602@os.inf.tu-dresden.de>
	<87r4grca4p.fsf@codemonkey.ws> <20130528171742.GB30296@redhat.com>
	<20130529074929.GC20199@stefanha-thinkpad.redhat.com>
	<20130529090859.GH4472@redhat.com>
	<20130529142143.GA9545@stefanha-thinkpad.redhat.com>
	<51A62680.2000808@os.inf.tu-dresden.de>
	<CAJSP0QXu5WDVot2BcfN8a2JXTi=rS32Rja3CeJGx4V=0+G1-Bw@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAJSP0QXu5WDVot2BcfN8a2JXTi=rS32Rja3CeJGx4V=0+G1-Bw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] snabbswitch integration with QEMU for userspace
 ethernet I/O
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@gmail.com>
Cc: "snabb-devel@googlegroups.com" <snabb-devel@googlegroups.com>, qemu-devel <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>, Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>, Julian Stecklina <jsteckli@os.inf.tu-dresden.de>

On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 08:46:42AM +0200, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 6:02 PM, Julian Stecklina
> <jsteckli@os.inf.tu-dresden.de> wrote:
> > On 05/29/2013 04:21 PM, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> >> The fact that a single switch process has shared memory access to all
> >> guests' RAM is critical.  If the switch process is exploited, then that
> >> exposes other guests' data!  (Think of a multi-tenant host with guests
> >> belonging to different users.)
> >
> > True. But people don't mind having instruction decoding and half of
> > virtio in the kernel these days, so it can't be that security critical...
> 
> No, it's still security critical.  If there were equivalent solutions
> with better security then I'm sure people would accept them.  It's
> just that there isn't an equivalent solution yet :).
> 
> Stefan

Some people would accept them.
Others run with selinux off ...

-- 
MST