W dniu sobota, 3 września 2016 14:11:04 UTC+2 użytkownik Andrew David Wong napisał: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA512 > > On 2016-09-03 04:58, grzegorz.chodzi...@gmail.com wrote: > > W dniu sobota, 3 września 2016 13:37:27 UTC+2 użytkownik pixel > > fairy napisał: > >> On Saturday, September 3, 2016 at 2:32:54 AM UTC-7, > >> grzegorz....@gmail.com wrote: > >>> I know that QubesOS is developed mostly with notebook use in > >>> mind, however some users, me included, opt to run it on > >>> desktop computers. The question is, is there any advantage of > >>> building a Qubes-dedicated machine on workstation/server > >>> components? > >> > >> mostly ecc ram. its a shame non-ecc is so prevalent. in practice, > >> i dont think the difference is worth it. there are many more > >> important variables. > >> > >>> Will Qubes be able to take advantage of higher core count in > >>> Xeon processors? Or two processors if a user decides to build > >>> a dual-CPU rig? Does the system performance scale with the > >>> number of available cores/ clock speed? > >> > >> yes. > >> > >>> Can it take advantage of ECC RAM? Server hardware that is few > >>> years old can be bought for dirt cheap (Xeon E5-2670 has 8 > >>> cores and costs about 75$). > >> > >> it will benefit the same as any another machine from ecc ram. > >> > >>> I'll be upgrading from my current PC and I'm seriously > >>> considering building a rig around a Xeon processor and a > >>> motherboard with ECC RAM but if there is no real benefit then > >>> what's the point? > >> > >> apparently price is the advantage, but think of your ears! > >> server hardware is loud. > >> > >> if your willing to spend more on good hardware, go for a good > >> ssd, and good ddr4 ram (G.Skill or Geil) in case bitflipping > >> attacks start showing up. > >> > >> http://news.softpedia.com/news/rowhammer-attack-now-works-on-ddr4-mem > ory-501898.shtml > > > >> > >> > > Xeon it is then. As for the rowhammering attack as far as I know > > ECC RAM is not vulnereable to that. > > Unfortunately, that's not true: > > "Tests show that simple ECC solutions, providing single-error > correction and double-error detection (SECDED) capabilities, are not > able to correct or detect all observed disturbance errors because some > of them include more than two flipped bits per memory word." > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Row_hammer#Mitigation > Back to the drawing board it is then. What other precautions can we take to mitigate this?
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "qubes-users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to qubes-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to email@example.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/qubes-users/f72fb0a3-ac5a-4057-bf7e-3931a7a3ad83%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.