Defending against Rowhammer in the kernel

Posted Oct 30, 2016 12:18 UTC (Sun) by spender (guest, #23067)
Parent article: Defending against Rowhammer in the kernel

More comments here from people with actual experience:
https://twitter.com/halvarflake/status/792314613568311296

My prediction is it won't matter whether it works or not, it'll be heralded as success in the same vein as KASLR.

-Brad

to post comments

Defending against Rowhammer in the kernel

Posted Nov 17, 2016 21:57 UTC (Thu) by mcortese (guest, #52099) [Link] (1 responses)

What a strange comment! Managing, in one sentence, to insinuate skepticism about the patch itself, and bad faith in whoever reports it.

Defending against Rowhammer in the kernel

Posted Nov 17, 2016 22:14 UTC (Thu) by spender (guest, #23067) [Link]

Do you have anything technical to contribute? I don't see any reason for your comment. Maybe you just haven't been here long enough if you don't notice the theme of optimistic upstream exceptionalism in all of the articles, facts be damned. Perhaps you could tell the world why you disagree with one of the key people who discovered and exploited rowhammer? Perhaps you could explain how you'd solve the limitations mentioned about the patch? Or perhaps you could point the rest of us to accurate reporting of KASLR where it's mentioned as a failure and waste of time, given the numerous generic defeats against it that have worked ever since its existence and despite numerous "improvements"?

I'll be waiting!

-Brad