[Info-vax] Throwhammer, remote Rowhammer via RDMA (was Re: CVE-2018-8897 Privilege Escalation due to widespread misunderstanding of x86-64 privileged instruction semantics)

[already5chosen at yahoo.com]

On Saturday, May 12, 2018 at 7:32:22 PM UTC+3, Stephen Hoffman wrote:
> On 2018-05-11 14:04:35 +0000, already5chosen at yahoo.com said:
> 
> > I don't want to speculate about long run, but at the short run DDR4 
> > (made by S and H, less so by M) is less vulnerable (or completely 
> > immune?) to Rowhammer than DDR3.
> 
> From 2016:  
> https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/03/once-thought-safe-ddr4-memory-shown-to-be-vulnerable-to-rowhammer/ 
> 

This article does not contradict what I wrote above - M is vulnerable. But even M-made DDR4 are less vulnerable than DDR3.

> 
> And given that throwhammer defenestrates an approach based on 
> whitelisted and trusted applications, as sketchy as that assumption was 
> given the numbers of latent vulnerabilities being found in existing 
> apps...
> 
> 
> -- 
> Pure Personal Opinion | HoffmanLabs LLC