If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Microsoft may abandon Palladium for AMD's NX-bit
Now these two stories confuse me a little bit. When we first heard about
Palladium (or NGSCB or whatever it's being called today), it was supposed to be this dire invasion of our privacies, etc., etc. But now it simply looks like it was something to stop viruses. So how exactly was Palladium supposed to work anyways? Was there supposed to be some hardware support for this technology, or was it entirely software? If there was hardware support, were they using separated code and data segments as has existed in 32-bit processors but never implemented, since the 386? What was Palladium supposed to be really? http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=15737 http://www.crn.com/sections/Breaking...rticleID=49936 Yousuf Khan -- Humans: contact me at ykhan at rogers dot com Spambots: just reply to this email address ;-) |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
On Wed, 05 May 2004 16:33:27 +0000, Yousuf Khan wrote:
Now these two stories confuse me a little bit. Not surprising since the Inquirer article is bogus. The NX bit is orthogonal to Palladium. When we first heard about Palladium (or NGSCB or whatever it's being called today), it was supposed to be this dire invasion of our privacies, etc., etc. But now it simply looks like it was something to stop viruses. Palladium provides little protection against viruses/worms; it's not intended to. So how exactly was Palladium supposed to work anyways? Was there supposed to be some hardware support for this technology, or was it entirely software? If there was hardware support, were they using separated code and data segments as has existed in 32-bit processors but never implemented, since the 386? What was Palladium supposed to be really? http://www.eff.org/Infrastructure/tr...0031001_tc.php http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~rja14/tcpa-faq.html -- Wes Felter - - http://felter.org/wesley/ |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Wes Felter wrote:
On Wed, 05 May 2004 16:33:27 +0000, Yousuf Khan wrote: What was Palladium supposed to be really? http://www.eff.org/Infrastructure/tr...0031001_tc.php http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~rja14/tcpa-faq.html Looks like security for THEM at our expense. I love being treated like a thief! This BS is why I stopped using MS products to start with! -- Stacey |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Wes Felter wrote:
Palladium provides little protection against viruses/worms; it's not intended to. So how exactly was Palladium supposed to work anyways? Was there supposed to be some hardware support for this technology, or was it entirely software? If there was hardware support, were they using separated code and data segments as has existed in 32-bit processors but never implemented, since the 386? What was Palladium supposed to be really? http://www.eff.org/Infrastructure/tr...0031001_tc.php http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~rja14/tcpa-faq.html Oh yes, now I remember what we were so afraid of Palladium for. :-) Your computer breaks down and you call for tech support, and part of the tech support questions would be, "were you trying to run something illegal, sir?" Yousuf Khan |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
CRN said:
"Microsoft's 64-bit Windows XP and Windows Server 2003 for Extended Systems will also support the NX feature in Intel Itanium processors for clients due out in the second half." I'd like to know how they do it now and how they plan to do it in the future, considering this sentence makes no sense to me. The Itanium architecture doesn't have an NX bit. There are two things they could do. First they could actually use the fact that Itanium has separate ITB and DTB and don't map your code pages into the data TLB! Second they could set their data pages' access rights level to 2 (read, write), and their instruction pages' access rights to 1 (read, execute) (other combinations would give more useful but equally safe access to various priviledged code). But really, what is the chance than Microsoft would write correct, much less safe, code? They don't even use the split TLB system properly or allow any page size besides 8KB, AFAIK. Alex -- My words are my own. They represent no other; they belong to no other. Don't read anything into them or you may be required to compensate me for violation of copyright. (I do not speak for my employer.) |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Yousuf Khan wrote:
Oh yes, now I remember what we were so afraid of Palladium for. :-) Your computer breaks down and you call for tech support, and part of the tech support questions would be, "were you trying to run something illegal, sir?" Well, more like: We determined that you have run something illegal. Homeland Security has been alerted! (back in the lurk mode -- Sam I am Spam alert! Reply-to address is bogus spam_heaven at sympatico dot ca is where I can be reached |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
On a sunny day (Thu, 06 May 2004 21:09:53 GMT) it happened "Yousuf Khan"
wrote in able.rogers.com: Wes Felter wrote: Palladium provides little protection against viruses/worms; it's not intended to. So how exactly was Palladium supposed to work anyways? Was there supposed to be some hardware support for this technology, or was it entirely software? If there was hardware support, were they using separated code and data segments as has existed in 32-bit processors but never implemented, since the 386? What was Palladium supposed to be really? http://www.eff.org/Infrastructure/tr...0031001_tc.php http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~rja14/tcpa-faq.html Oh yes, now I remember what we were so afraid of Palladium for. :-) Your computer breaks down and you call for tech support, and part of the tech support questions would be, "were you trying to run something illegal, sir?" Yousuf Khan In the US that would be: 'Can you PROVE you were not running anything illegal'? This law will make it, as it saves companies ++++ on support. JP |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
"Alex Johnson" wrote in message
... CRN said: "Microsoft's 64-bit Windows XP and Windows Server 2003 for Extended Systems will also support the NX feature in Intel Itanium processors for clients due out in the second half." I'd like to know how they do it now and how they plan to do it in the future, considering this sentence makes no sense to me. The Itanium architecture doesn't have an NX bit. There are two things they could do. First they could actually use the fact that Itanium has separate ITB and DTB and don't map your code pages into the data TLB! Second they could set their data pages' access rights level to 2 (read, write), and their instruction pages' access rights to 1 (read, execute) (other combinations would give more useful but equally safe access to various priviledged code). But really, what is the chance than Microsoft would write correct, much less safe, code? They don't even use the split TLB system properly or allow any page size besides 8KB, AFAIK. I was wondering about that, i.e. how data and instruction pages are separated in Itanium? So it's actually done with two separate page tables, as opposed to a single page table with a special attribute. This would also make more sense in long-term architectural design point of view, as Itanium is brand new and they can take brand new paths like this, whereas with x86 you have to take somewhat more limited steps. Yousuf Khan |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
"Alex Johnson" wrote in message
... CRN said: "Microsoft's 64-bit Windows XP and Windows Server 2003 for Extended Systems will also support the NX feature in Intel Itanium processors for clients due out in the second half." I'd like to know how they do it now and how they plan to do it in the future, considering this sentence makes no sense to me. The Itanium architecture doesn't have an NX bit. There are two things they could do. First they could actually use the fact that Itanium has separate ITB and DTB and don't map your code pages into the data TLB! Second they could set their data pages' access rights level to 2 (read, write), and their instruction pages' access rights to 1 (read, execute) (other combinations would give more useful but equally safe access to various priviledged code). But really, what is the chance than Microsoft would write correct, much less safe, code? They don't even use the split TLB system properly or allow any page size besides 8KB, AFAIK. http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/de...ge_support.asp Thanks, Eugene Alex -- My words are my own. They represent no other; they belong to no other. Don't read anything into them or you may be required to compensate me for violation of copyright. (I do not speak for my employer.) |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Alex Johnson wrote in message ...
The Itanium architecture doesn't have an NX bit. There are two things they could do. First they could actually use the fact that Itanium has separate ITB and DTB and don't map your code pages into the data TLB! Second they could set their data pages' access rights level to 2 (read, write), and their instruction pages' access rights to 1 (read, execute) (other combinations would give more useful but equally safe access to various priviledged code). But really, what is the chance than Microsoft would write correct, much less safe, code? They don't even use the split TLB system properly or allow any page size besides 8KB, AFAIK. This is silly. Page access rights on IPF let you do everything you can do with the U/S, R/W and NX bits on an x86, and then some. Or do you think that somehow being able to explicitly disable execution on a page is somehow different than having to explicitly enable it? |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
help! NVIDIA GeForce2 M changes my settings... | Serial # 19781010 | Nvidia Videocards | 1 | September 13th 04 09:14 PM |
XP SP-2 | Rick & Darlene | Asus Motherboards | 59 | August 29th 04 01:05 AM |
My system seems to "recover" with great frequency | Louise | Homebuilt PC's | 3 | May 17th 04 06:02 AM |
FPS Really LOW - Whats Wrong? | John W. | Ati Videocards | 5 | January 20th 04 08:09 AM |
Flood of virus and patch warnings from Microsoft. Is a new worm loose or is it spam? | Phil Weldon | Overclocking | 28 | September 21st 03 05:34 AM |