Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I wasn't addressing the paging system issue, but that was definitely FUD too. FUD does not have to be disinformation per se. Its main property is the spread of a generally negative viewpoint that is intended to persuade the recipient to side with the negative actor.

Even if the paging system is broken, that's no reason to simply stop using VMs on it, or to say it's impossible to have a secure VM on a system with broken paging. It's perfectly possible to have a VM on a broken-paging machine that's more secure than a working-paging machine's OS, with or without a VM.

De Raadt was not trying to make a rational argument about the validity of VMs on faulty hardware. He was literally saying you are stupid if you put a VM on x86 and expect it to be secure. Which is a stupid thing to say without knowing anything about the OSes, or what the alternative might be, either platform or OS-wise, to say nothing of hardening.

De Raadt has a bone to pick with Intel and specifically x86-based machines, and is simply interested in convincing people not to use it by insinuating you're innately not capable of doing secure computing on it. Which is basically untrue. That's why it's FUD.



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: