From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.1 (2015-04-28) on inbox.vuxu.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,
	MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
	version=3.4.1
Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (minnie.tuhs.org [45.79.103.53])
	by inbox.vuxu.org (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTP id 83fc0147
	for <ml@inbox.vuxu.org>;
	Tue, 26 Jun 2018 22:34:17 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112)
	id EAE78A18B7; Wed, 27 Jun 2018 08:34:16 +1000 (AEST)
Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B20EAA18AB;
	Wed, 27 Jun 2018 08:33:54 +1000 (AEST)
Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112)
 id 2AD79A18AB; Wed, 27 Jun 2018 08:33:54 +1000 (AEST)
Received: from p3plsmtpa07-02.prod.phx3.secureserver.net
 (p3plsmtpa07-02.prod.phx3.secureserver.net [173.201.192.231])
 by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6B30EA189F
 for <tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org>; Wed, 27 Jun 2018 08:33:43 +1000 (AEST)
Received: from medusa.kilonet.net ([72.69.223.155]) by :SMTPAUTH: with ESMTPA
 id XwWsf08KXU3O0XwWsfehRB; Tue, 26 Jun 2018 15:33:42 -0700
Received: from [199.89.231.101] (ender.kilonet.net [199.89.231.101])
 by medusa.kilonet.net (8.14.8/8.15.1) with ESMTP id w5QMXfkQ006331
 for <tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org>; Tue, 26 Jun 2018 18:33:41 -0400 (EDT)
To: tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org
References: <CMM.0.96.0.1530035664.beebe@gamma.math.utah.edu>
 <BE30EA2F-6E25-4197-92B4-940BF8BBF0AD@ronnatalie.com>
 <1f8043fd-e8d6-a5e6-5849-022d1a41f5bf@kilonet.net>
 <20180626215012.GE8150@mcvoy.com>
 <B9CFE92A-0090-4576-8E11-83EB63AE05EF@ronnatalie.com>
 <20180626215905.GH8150@mcvoy.com>
 <117BE24B-C768-43ED-A470-40FCD1662ECD@bitblocks.com>
From: Arthur Krewat <krewat@kilonet.net>
Message-ID: <769e0f86-eb90-0ec5-e744-319ab74dbd85@kilonet.net>
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2018 18:33:37 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/52.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <117BE24B-C768-43ED-A470-40FCD1662ECD@bitblocks.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Language: en-US
X-CMAE-Envelope: MS4wfE8SwI7VXnt5H7rM4ii0bN9dxAql4wZhik6ozQuJj10lqqR9r2Q+QQhXT1U/wyb4PV+Z4lxesOIBfvVA0+xSdOTIxyuRA1PnzHynoONNcKdF10XbnSu6
 Bhc4JOHSFe7/I2rqa/mNEbgBRpEZrmYot+cE8VH2QE80VVkJk9zvs3d8K4Sib1Dfr9aPLE+6QNutFg==
Subject: Re: [TUHS] PDP-11 legacy, C, and modern architectures
X-BeenThere: tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20
Precedence: list
List-Id: The Unix Heritage Society mailing list <tuhs.minnie.tuhs.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://minnie.tuhs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/tuhs>,
 <mailto:tuhs-request@minnie.tuhs.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/tuhs/>
List-Post: <mailto:tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tuhs-request@minnie.tuhs.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://minnie.tuhs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tuhs>,
 <mailto:tuhs-request@minnie.tuhs.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org
Sender: "TUHS" <tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org>

On 6/26/2018 6:20 PM, Bakul Shah wrote:
> it is becoming increasingly clear that
> caching (hidden memory to continue with the illusion of a simple memory
> model) itself is a potential security issue.

Then let's discuss why caching is the problem. If thread X reads memory 
location A, why is thread Y able to access that cached value? Shouldn't 
that cached value be associated with memory location A which I would 
assume would be in a protected space that thread Y shouldn't be able to 
access?

I know the nuts and bolts of how this cache exploit works, that's not 
what I'm asking.

What I'm asking is, why is cache accessible in the first place? Any 
cache offset should have the same memory protection as the value it 
represents. Isn't this the CPU manufacturer's fault?


art k.