Re: [Xen-devel] Questions about PVH in Xen 4.3 unstable

[Samuel Thibault <samuel.thibault@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Jan Beulich, le Wed 30 Jan 2013 11:29:00 +0000, a écrit :
> >>> On 30.01.13 at 12:04, George Dunlap <George.Dunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 10:52 AM, tech mailinglists <
> > mailinglists.tech@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > 
> >> I thought that stubdoms for HVMs are great for security. Can it still be
> >> used for PV-on-HVM for security? Can only Linux run as PVH and Windows and
> >> so on still run as HVM?
> >>
> > 
> > Stubdoms increase security by isolating the qemu process, so that it's not
> > running in domain 0.  PV domains (and by extension PVH domains) don't have
> > a qemu process, and are therefore are secure without needing a stubdom.
> 
> That's not generally true - PV domains (including Dom0 itself) can
> have a qemu e.g. for providing a block backend drivers for certain
> disk types.

Right. And unfortunately one can't use a stubdom for that, since that'd
only move the disk access problem to the stubdom.

Samuel

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel