3 ms·
Couldn't a microkernel forego the expensive mitigations when switching between kernel processes? It wouldn't get the level of isolation that it ideally should,
by mike_hock 7y ago
Couldn't a microkernel forego the expensive mitigations when switching between kernel processes? It wouldn't get the level of isolation that it ideally should, but it would still gain a lot over a monolithic kernel with fully shared memory.
- tedunangst 7y agoHard to make this a consistent coherent argument though. The microkernel will be secure because it has Spectre mitigations. The microkernel will be fast because it doesn't use Spectre mitigations. ?
- mike_hock 7y agoThe "microkernel" will be more secure than a monolithic kernel because a breach in one subsystem will confine an attacker to what is possible with Spectre exploits, as opposed to being able to read and write any memory directly.
- tedunangst 7y agoBut parent claims that with CPU vulns, the need for microkernel has never been greater. You're talking about disabling those mitigations. The need for general address space separation hasn't been changed by Spectre.
- mike_hock 7y agoYes, you're right.