Displaying 20 results from an estimated 3000 matches similar to: "Xen 4.4 Immediate EOL"
2018 Jan 19
1
Xen 4.4 Immediate EOL
On 01/19/2018 06:17 AM, Pasi K?rkk?inen wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 11:48:35AM -0600, Kevin Stange wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>
> Hi,
>
>> I am very sorry to do this on short notice, but obviously Meltdown and
>> Spectre are a lot more than anyone was really expecting to come down the
>> pipeline. Xen 4.4 has been EOL upstream for about a year now and I
2018 Jan 19
0
Xen 4.4 Immediate EOL
On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 11:48:35AM -0600, Kevin Stange wrote:
> Hi,
>
Hi,
> I am very sorry to do this on short notice, but obviously Meltdown and
> Spectre are a lot more than anyone was really expecting to come down the
> pipeline. Xen 4.4 has been EOL upstream for about a year now and I have
> personally been reviewing and backporting patches based on the 4.5
> versions
2018 Jan 08
4
Response to Meltdown and Spectre
By now, we're sure most everyone have heard of the Meltdown and Spectre
attacks. If not, head over to https://meltdownattack.com/ and get an
overview. Additional technical details are available from Google
Project Zero.
https://googleprojectzero.blogspot.com/2018/01/reading-privileged-memory-with-side.html
The FreeBSD Security Team was notified of the issue in late December
and received a
2018 Jan 08
4
Response to Meltdown and Spectre
By now, we're sure most everyone have heard of the Meltdown and Spectre
attacks. If not, head over to https://meltdownattack.com/ and get an
overview. Additional technical details are available from Google
Project Zero.
https://googleprojectzero.blogspot.com/2018/01/reading-privileged-memory-with-side.html
The FreeBSD Security Team was notified of the issue in late December
and received a
2018 Jan 18
0
Xen 4.4 Immediate EOL
On 01/18/2018 11:48 AM, Kevin Stange wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am very sorry to do this on short notice, but obviously Meltdown and
> Spectre are a lot more than anyone was really expecting to come down the
> pipeline. Xen 4.4 has been EOL upstream for about a year now and I have
> personally been reviewing and backporting patches based on the 4.5
> versions made available
2018 Mar 16
2
spectre variant 2
Hi all!
I'm running an up-to-date Centos-7 on an AMD Vishera 6300, 6 core CPU.
I note that when I run the redhat script to test for spectre & meltdown
I get this result for variant 2:
Variant #2 (Spectre): Vulnerable
CVE-2017-5715 - speculative execution branch target injection
- Kernel with mitigation patches: OK
- HW support / updated microcode: NO
- IBRS: Not disabled on
2018 Jan 18
1
Xen 4.4 Immediate EOL
On 01/18/2018 09:56 AM, Kevin Stange wrote:
> Apparently I failed to do proper due diligence before making this
> recommendation. The Xen 4.4 repo does not have vixen build because of a
> dependency upon grub2 which isn't available under CentOS 6. Your best
> bet would be to use Vixen for PV domains, so if you think that's
> something you want to do, we need some
2018 Jan 23
2
Xen 4.6.6-9 (with XPTI meltdown mitigation) packages making their way to centos-virt-xen-testing
On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 4:50 PM, Nathan March <nathan at gt.net> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > Hmm.. isn't this the ldisc bug that was discussed a few months ago on
> this
> list,
> > and a patch was applied to virt-sig kernel aswell?
> >
> > Call trace looks similar..
>
> Good memory! I'd forgotten about that despite being the one who ran into
>
2019 Dec 12
2
Xen Version update policy
On Mon, Dec 2, 2019 at 5:08 PM Kevin Stange <kevin at steadfast.net> wrote:
> By supporting only even numbered releases as is the case now, it has not
> been possible to do hot migration based upgrades which means that we
> have to do full reboots of our entire environment every so often. Right
> now we're running on Xen 4.8 and transitioning to 4.12 directly. We
>
2019 Jun 12
1
Speculative attack mitigations
Hi folks,
Firstly; apologies in advance for what is a head wrecker of keeping on top of the speculative mitigations and also if this is a duplicate email; my first copy didn't seem to make it into the archive. Also a disclaimer that I may have misunderstood elements of the below but please bear with me.
I write this hoping to find out a bit more about the state of the relevant kernel
2018 Jan 07
1
CVE-2017-5715, CVE-2017-5753 and CVE-2017-5754
How about kernel-lt and kernel-ml?
Mike
On 01/04/2018 05:41 PM, Warren Young wrote:
> On Jan 4, 2018, at 12:18 PM, Walter H. <walter.h at mathemainzel.info> wrote:
>> will there be updates for these CVEs for CentOS 6?
> Red Hat hasn?t released them all yet. Quoting Christopher Robinson in the thread for this here:
>
> https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2018:0007
2019 Jun 25
2
Are XSA-289, XSA-274/CVE-2018-14678 fixed ?
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
2018 Jan 17
4
Xen 4.6.6-9 (with XPTI meltdown mitigation) packages making their way to centos-virt-xen-testing
I've built & tagged packages for CentOS 6 and 7 4.6.6-9, with XPTI
"stage 1" Meltdown mitigation.
This will allow 64-bit PV guests to run safely (with a few caveats),
but incurs a fairly significant slowdown for 64-bit PV guests on Intel
boxes (including domain 0).
If you prefer using Vixen / Comet, you can turn it off by adding
'xpti=0' to your Xen command-line.
2017 Aug 23
2
4.4.4-26 with XSA-226, 227, 230 in centos-virt-testing
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.
--
2018 Mar 09
4
CentOS 6 i386 - meltdown and spectre
Hi Johnny,
Thank you for your reply.
It seems to me that my message may have came around as offensive but that
was not my intend. I have basic understanding how things work and when I
said CentOS I actually meant Red Hat and all its derivatives. I asked
CentOS community because that's the community I'm member of. Not to say
that CentOS is not secure or anything like that.
Anyway,
2017 Mar 25
2
NIC Stability Problems Under Xen 4.4 / CentOS 6 / Linux 3.18
On 03/16/2017 04:22 PM, Kevin Stange wrote:
>> I still can't rest assured the NIC issue is fixed, but no 4.4 or 4.9
>> server has yet had a NIC issue, with some being up almost a full month.
>> It looks promising! (I'm knocking on all the wood everywhere, though.)
>
> I'm ready to call this conclusive. The problems I was having across the
> board seemed to
2018 Jan 24
2
Xen 4.6.6-9 (with XPTI meltdown mitigation) packages making their way to centos-virt-xen-testing
On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 06:20:39PM -0600, Kevin Stange wrote:
> On 01/23/2018 05:57 PM, Karl Johnson wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 4:50 PM, Nathan March <nathan at gt.net
> > <mailto:nathan at gt.net>> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > > Hmm.. isn't this the ldisc bug that was discussed a few months ago on this
2017 Jan 24
2
NIC Stability Problems Under Xen 4.4 / CentOS 6 / Linux 3.18
On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 09:29:39PM +0800, -=X.L.O.R.D=- wrote:
> Kevin Stange,
> It can be either kernel or update the NIC driver or firmware of the NIC
> card. Hope that helps!
>
> Xlord
> -----Original Message-----
> From: CentOS-virt [mailto:centos-virt-bounces at centos.org] On Behalf Of Kevin
> Stange
> Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2017 1:04 AM
> To: centos-virt
2017 Feb 12
3
NIC Stability Problems Under Xen 4.4 / CentOS 6 / Linux 3.18
On 11/02/17 06:29, Kevin Stange wrote:
> On 01/30/2017 06:41 PM, Kevin Stange wrote:
>> On 01/30/2017 06:12 PM, Adi Pircalabu wrote:
>>> On 31/01/17 10:49, Kevin Stange wrote:
>>>> You said 3.x kernels specifically. The kernel on Xen Made Easy now is a
>>>> 4.4 kernel. Any chance you have tested with that one?
>>>
>>> Not yet, however
2018 Mar 06
2
CentOS 6 i386 - meltdown and spectre
I have a clean install, fully updated CentOS 6 32-bit.
When I run the Red Hat detection script:
https://access.redhat.com/sites/default/files/spectre-meltdown--a79614b.sh
it finds that the system is vulnerable.
Is this false positive or there is no patches for CentOS 6 32-bit systems?
Thank you,
-- Peter