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 qubes-users@googlegroups.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.

Reply via email to