5 ms·

Interesting that the patch is just one characters difference (applied in two locations) 0x3ff to 0xff

• boardwaalk 12y ago
  Seems to me like they should be using constants. Especially since this implies the 0xff/256 is elsewhere as well: elsewhere a 256 rather than 1024 wide window is being used too
  • tarpherder 12y ago
    *0xff/255 Simple but potentially dangerous right? :P
• spacefight 12y ago
  Deliberate? Coincidence?
  • chc 12y ago
    It's pretty certain they deliberately changed both instances of the number. How is that even a question?
• jonknee 12y ago
  From the patch: > While the write path change appears to be purely cosmetic (but still gets done here for consistency), the read side mistake permitted accesses beyond the virtual APIC page. http://xenbits.xen.org/xsa/xsa108.patch http://xenbits.xen.org/xsa/xsa108.patch
• ultramancool 12y ago
  Yep, it seems only to change a small memory range. I'm guessing this means this isn't highly exploitable, but contains at least some risk of leaking private information. Can anyone with more experience with this specific APIC stuff comment? Could you get different data each time or only the same small range?