similar to: updating for XSA-108 -

Hello, A couple of TODO items/suggestions: 1) Xen 4.2.4 was just released: http://lists.xen.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2014-02/msg01624.html I think we should first update Xen4Centos6 rpms to Xen 4.2.4 to have a "known good" release from the stable branch currently in use in Xen4Centos6. 2) After that, we should start packaging/testing Xen 4.3.2:

The Xen Project has publicly released XSA-138: http://xenbits.xen.org/xsa/advisory-138.html All users using HVM (fully virtualized) guests with emulated CDROM drives are advised to upgrade. There are signed versions of Xen4CentOS6 packages uploaded to the mirror system. There are also unsigned packages available on the CBS: http://cbs.centos.org/repos/virt6-testing/x86_64/os/Packages/

We need a way to do two things to /usr/bin/grub-bootxen.sh in Xen4CentOS. 1. Automate running it if xen (the package) and the xen kernel are installed. But only if the user WANTS to run it. 2. Allow users to automatically modify the variables passed into the xen.gz line (that is, more or less memory, add console settings, etc.) If you look at the current script,

Hello, Are XSA-289 and XSA-274/CVE-2018-14678 fixed with Xen recent 4.8, 4.10 and kernel 4.9.177 packages ? Thank you

Ian Jackson writes ("64bit PV guest breakout [XSA-213]"): > Source: xen > Version: 4.4.1-9 > Severity: important > Tags: security upstream fixed-upstream > > See > https://xenbits.xen.org/xsa/advisory-213.html Ian Jackson writes ("grant transfer allows PV guest to elevate privileges [XSA-214]"): > Source: xen > Version: 4.4.1-9 > Severity:

Moritz Muehlenhoff writes ("Re: Xen package security updates for jessie 4.4, XSA-213, XSA-214"): > On Thu, May 04, 2017 at 05:59:18PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: > > Should I put jessie-security in the debian/changelog and dgit push it > > (ie, from many people's pov, dput it) ? > > Yes, the distribution line should be jessie-security, but please send > a

Dear Security Team, I have prepared a new upload addressing a number of open security issues in Xen. Due to the complexity of the patches that address XSA-273 [0] the packages have been built from upstream's staging-4.8 / staging-4.10 branch again as recommended in that advisory. Commits on those branches are restricted to those that address the following XSAs (cf. [1]): - XSA-273

Moritz M?hlenhoff writes ("Re: Updated Xen packages for XSA 216..225"): > Since the queue was already quite big and this update was ready > I went ahead and released what we had for now. Yes, sorry, I should have been explicit that that's what I expected you to do... Ian.

Salvatore Bonaccorso writes ("Re: Updated Xen packages for XSA 216..225"): > On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 11:34:38PM +0200, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 03, 2017 at 12:33:54PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: > > > Moritz M?hlenhoff writes ("Re: Updated Xen packages for XSA 216..225"): > > > > Sorry for the late reply, was on vacation for a week.

Xen 4.4.4 along with kernel 4.9.44 containing patches for XSAs (226 - 230) from August 15th are now available in centos-virt-testing. If possible, please test and provide feedback here so we can move these to release soon. XSA-228 did not affect Xen 4.4 XSA-229 only applies to the kernel XSA-235 disclosed today only affects ARM and isn't going to be added to these packages. Thanks. --

We've been using CentOS 5 with Xen on our machines for a while now and have really grown to appreciate it. The lack of Xen for Centos 6 is the reason we haven't upgraded yet, but with Xen4CentOS6 we have all the tools we need. The concern some of are having is that when CentOS7 comes out, which will be probably less than a year, is that Xen support for CentOS6 will evaporate. I know this

Given the circumstances, might it make sense to offer formal advisories of some type for these to indicate when the packages going to live are for security or other reasons? On 02/17/2017 09:51 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote: > These updates have now been pushed to mirror.centos.org and you can get > them from the main repos. > > On 02/15/2017 08:27 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote: >> There

Kevin has been rolling back the security updates to the 4.4 branch. He has been working with some of the other distros (debian for sure, and some others on the xen security list). I think it is his intention to continue this for as long as he is able to. (Kevin, chime in if you have a schedule lifetime or EOL in mind) As long as Kevin (or anyone else) maintains the tree, I am happy to build

Moritz Muehlenhoff writes ("Re: Xen package security updates for jessie 4.4, XSA-213, XSA-214"): > Yes, the distribution line should be jessie-security, but please send > a debdiff to team at security.debian.org for a quick review before > uploading (I have no idea whether dgit supports security-master). Here is the proposed debdiff (actually, a git diff) for xen in jessie. My

On Mon, Jul 03, 2017 at 12:33:54PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: > Moritz M?hlenhoff writes ("Re: Updated Xen packages for XSA 216..225"): > > Sorry for the late reply, was on vacation for a week. What's the status > > of jessie? Most of the XSAs seem to affect oldstable as well. > > Sorry, I forgot about them... > > I will see what I can do. Did you look

Source: xen Version: 4.8.1~pre.2017.01.23-1 Severity: grave Tags: security upstream Justification: user security hole Hi, the following vulnerability was published for xen. CVE-2017-7228[0]: | An issue (known as XSA-212) was discovered in Xen, with fixes available | for 4.8.x, 4.7.x, 4.6.x, 4.5.x, and 4.4.x. The earlier XSA-29 fix | introduced an insufficient check on XENMEM_exchange input,

Moritz Muehlenhoff writes ("Re: Xen package security updates for jessie 4.4, XSA-213, XSA-214"): > On Thu, May 04, 2017 at 05:06:07PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: > > I have fixed these in stretch but the jessie package remains unfixed. > > I think I may be able to find some backports somewhere. Would that be > > useful ? Is anyone else working on this ? > >

It looks like no XSA-142 patch, which is "libxl fails to honour readonly flag on disks with qemu-xen" has been applied to Xen4CentOS. I assume this was on purpose? If not, I can have someone try adding the original patch from http://xenbits.xen.org/xsa/advisory-142.html and some variant of the commit from ef6cb76026628e26e3d1ae53c50ccde1c3c78b1b

On Mon, Aug 07, 2017 at 01:15:56PM +0200, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote: > On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 03:58:20PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: > > Salvatore Bonaccorso writes ("Re: Updated Xen packages for XSA 216..225"): > > > On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 11:34:38PM +0200, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote: > > > > On Mon, Jul 03, 2017 at 12:33:54PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: >

Hi list, Jeff and FastIce pointed out a regression between Xen 4.1.2 and 4.1.6 when starting NetBSD domU; the kernel syms table gets slightly corrupted [1]. After dwelling into libxc code, FastIce noticed that changing back the return value to "ptr + offset" (instead of just "ptr") for xc_dom_vaddr_to_ptr() makes it work again. According to [2] while fixing XSA-55, Ian