Re: Meltdown and spectre

I'll just leave these here for people interested on WHY this is an Intel CPU problem (primarily) that is forcing Software makers to patch around the problem.

https://twitter.com/gsuberland/status/948907452786933762

https://twitter.com/ryanaraine/status/948969182833524738

https://twitter.com/aionescu/status/948818841747955713

https://twitter.com/securelyfitz/status/949038253838970880

On Fri, Jan 5, 2018 at 3:34 PM, Reen, Elizabeth <dmarc-noreply_at_freelists.org
> wrote:

> All of that happens in the O/S not on the chip. One does not
> log into a processor.
>
>
>
>
>
> Liz
>
>
>
> Elizabeth Reen
> CPB Database Group Manager
> 718.248.9930 <(718)%20248-9930> (Office)
>
> Service Now Group: CPB-ORACLE-DB-SUPPORT
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org [mailto:oracle-l-bounce_at_
> freelists.org] *On Behalf Of *Tim Hall
> *Sent:* Friday, January 05, 2018 4:06 PM
> *To:* rajendra.pande_at_ubs.com
> *Cc:* Andrew Kerber; Mark W. Farnham; oracle-l_at_freelists.org;
> dmarc-noreply_at_freelists.org; fmhabash_at_gmail.com;
> niall.litchfield_at_gmail.com
> *Subject:* RE: Meltdown and spectre
>
>
>
> According to this the RHEL fixes can be overridden if you need performance.
>
>
>
> https://access.redhat.com/articles/3307751
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__access.redhat.com_articles_3307751&d=DwMFaQ&c=j-EkbjBYwkAB4f8ZbVn1Fw&r=yWMFosURAngbt8VLeJtKLVJGefQxustAZ9UxecV7xpc&m=DefUibHP8mOarbcy_Sqc0vqq2lYmneEXAHlsUQivcb8&s=Ts69z7hsaaCuS9AcmtuVLi-4TXmIiEJGiIY3-U623JU&e=>
>
>
>
> They say bare-metal and containers have similar overheads, but virtual
> guests are likely to be hit harder...
>
>
>
> Cheers
>
>
>
> Tim... (On crappy phone)
>
>
>
> On 5 Jan 2018 7:04 pm, <rajendra.pande_at_ubs.com> wrote:
>
> The answer (ref meltdown) apparently is KAISER that has shown to be
> effective against Meltdown and hence (I guess) updates to the OS
>
>
>
> https://www.reuters.com/article/us-cyber-intel-
> researcher/how-a-researcher-hacked-his-own-computer-and-
> found-worst-chip-flaw-idUSKBN1ET1ZR
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.reuters.com_article_us-2Dcyber-2Dintel-2Dresearcher_how-2Da-2Dresearcher-2Dhacked-2Dhis-2Down-2Dcomputer-2Dand-2Dfound-2Dworst-2Dchip-2Dflaw-2DidUSKBN1ET1ZR&d=DwMFaQ&c=j-EkbjBYwkAB4f8ZbVn1Fw&r=yWMFosURAngbt8VLeJtKLVJGefQxustAZ9UxecV7xpc&m=DefUibHP8mOarbcy_Sqc0vqq2lYmneEXAHlsUQivcb8&s=5gOzYaSHcG0HE_NGKyIdRbISTO3K7A2PXG2nwkleug0&e=>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org [mailto:oracle-l-bounce_at_
> freelists.org] *On Behalf Of *Andrew Kerber
> *Sent:* Friday, January 05, 2018 1:58 PM
> *To:* Mark W. Farnham
> *Cc:* ORACLE-L; dmarc-noreply_at_freelists.org; fmh;
> niall.litchfield_at_gmail.com; tim_at_oracle-base.com
> *Subject:* Re: Meltdown and spectre
>
>
>
> According to what i am reading Meltdown affects only Intel, but AMD is
> affected by Spectre, as is Intel. And spectre may be a more difficult fix
> in the long run.
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 5, 2018 at 11:55 AM Mark W. Farnham <mwf_at_rsiz.com> wrote:
>
> re: 2) was my question:
>
>
>
> “So, will there be an “insecure” patch to skip the overhead and rely on
> server access control?”
>
> Follow-up: For all the millions of single user in fact intel based
> systems, will there be “insecure” patches?
>
> The point being, yes, you will have to do patches outside of lab machines
> kept for particular vintage reasons.
>
> Will you be forced to get the performance penalty?
>
>
>
> *From:* oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org [mailto:oracle-l-bounce_at_
> freelists.org] *On Behalf Of *Tim Hall
> *Sent:* Friday, January 05, 2018 12:18 PM
> *To:* dmarc-noreply_at_freelists.org
> *Cc:* mwf_at_rsiz.com; niall.litchfield_at_gmail.com; andrew.kerber_at_gmail.com;
> fmh; ORACLE-L
>
>
> *Subject:* Re: Meltdown and spectre
>
>
>
> Does not compute.
>
>
>
> 1) This is a problem with Intel chips. It's not a problem with Linux. The
> OS vendors are putting in patches to fix/mitigate issues so you don't have
> to scrap your Intel servers and replace them with servers with AMD chips.
>
>
>
> 2) Do I need to patch my servers? So you are never going to patch your
> kernel again? Ever? If you ever do, you will get these fixes. Good luck
> with never patching stuff again...
>
>
>
> Cheers
>
>
>
> Tim...
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 5, 2018 at 5:06 PM, Reen, Elizabeth <
> dmarc-noreply_at_freelists.org> wrote:
>
> Since all of my servers are in house behind numerous
> firewalls, do I need to patch everything? The performance hit is going to
> hurt. Do I need to do that for dev and testing servers which run with
> redacted data? I could need to double the amount of servers I own. Yes
> they are cheap, but it adds up after a while. What about licenses? Will I
> need to up them because I need more iron to do the same work?
>
>
>
> I agree that you can’t stop a fully prived account from
> reading memory under this scenario. It is a bad operating system that lets
> this happen. Given the say Linux was developed, it is easy for something
> like this to sneak through. Linux is a great o/s, but you get what you pay
> for here. The reason it is so popular is that it is so inexpensive. This
> is not an issue in AIX, Sparc, or HP/UX. They cost money because they have
> been designed and tested. They did not start out life as an alternative to
> windows.
>
>
>
> Wrapper on every syscall is probably the fastest fix. It is
> far from the best fix. Hopefully they will put in the correct fix.
>
>
>
> Liz
>
>
>
> *From:* oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org [mailto:oracle-l-bounce_at_
> freelists.org] *On Behalf Of *Mark W. Farnham
> *Sent:* Friday, January 05, 2018 8:38 AM
> *To:* niall.litchfield_at_gmail.com; andrew.kerber_at_gmail.com
> *Cc:* 'fmh'; 'ORACLE-L'
> *Subject:* RE: Meltdown and spectre
>
>
>
> This also poses what I think is a relevant question for folks who place
> their physical RDBMS server(s) securely and only have privileged logons
> anyway. (You really can’t stop a fully privileged account from viewing
> memory or any other resources anyway and only in memory encryption can
> frustrate that if a bad actor has gained a privileged access to a server.)
>
>
>
> So, will there be an “insecure” patch to skip the overhead and rely on
> server access control?
>
>
>
> Then we can have a fresh round of the debate about whether “physical” or
> “virtual” is faster with the playing field thus tilted significantly in
> favor of “physical.”
>
>
>
> I also wonder for “virtual” servers whether this could be merely a
> “hypervisor” patch (which in ring security theory dating back to the 1970’s
> could establish a memory address bounded area at the privileged account
> layer (which should be a heckuva lot cheaper than a wrapper on every
> “syscall.”)
>
>
>
> DTSS is lookin’ pretty good right now. Still it was our own fault for not
> explaining clearly to enough to management that 100 million (plus) copies
> at $39.95 each was more than 12 copies at $10 million each. Sigh.
>
>
>
> mwf
>
>
>
> *From:* oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org [mailto:oracle-l-bounce_at_
> freelists.org <oracle-l-bounce_at_freelists.org>] *On Behalf Of *Niall
> Litchfield
> *Sent:* Thursday, January 04, 2018 10:58 AM
> *To:* andrew.kerber_at_gmail.com
> *Cc:* fmh; ORACLE-L
> *Subject:* Re: Meltdown and spectre
>
>
>
> There absolutely should be an OEL patch for this - for the RH kernel
> they'll probably take upstream - for UEK I'd expect an Oracle patch. I'd
> expect Oracle shops to be regression testing to determine the likely impact
> on RDBMS (and java app for that matter) performance.
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 3:40 PM, Andrew Kerber <andrew.kerber_at_gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> I was wondering the same thing. But I dont think its up to Oracle to patch
> this, its going to be at the OS and firmware level. But everything I read
> says that its going be a huge performance hit, anywhere from 10-50%, and
> the higher end will be on IO bound systems.
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 9:33 AM, Fred Habash <fmhabash_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Checked Oracle security bulletins but didn't find anything related. Did
> Oracle release an official statement for these vulnerabilities at least for
> the RDBMS and OEL.
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Andrew W. Kerber
>
> 'If at first you dont succeed, dont take up skydiving.'
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Niall Litchfield
> Oracle DBA
> http://www.orawin.info
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.orawin.info&d=DwMFaQ&c=j-EkbjBYwkAB4f8ZbVn1Fw&r=yWMFosURAngbt8VLeJtKLVJGefQxustAZ9UxecV7xpc&m=Ent2QwI0UZIJhxZc_4tIFF6zE5BswrZloZ3PSouSC-s&s=tG0aJf6IYCqHy0hWApVNL3Fgpp7csC57ox5qflq6Org&e=>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Andrew W. Kerber
>
> 'If at first you dont succeed, dont take up skydiving.'
>
>
>
> Please visit our website at
> http://financialservicesinc.ubs.com/wealth/E-maildisclaimer.html
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__financialservicesinc.ubs.com_wealth_E-2Dmaildisclaimer.html&d=DwMFaQ&c=j-EkbjBYwkAB4f8ZbVn1Fw&r=yWMFosURAngbt8VLeJtKLVJGefQxustAZ9UxecV7xpc&m=DefUibHP8mOarbcy_Sqc0vqq2lYmneEXAHlsUQivcb8&s=Nt4EpbCt5o7Zw7ATaOlGCrtYlDrxT97Uey1C6LFQGJs&e=>
> for important disclosures and information about our e-mail
> policies. For your protection, please do not transmit orders
> or instructions by e-mail or include account numbers, Social
> Security numbers, credit card numbers, passwords, or other
> personal information.
>

--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l