Re: [qubes-users] 2 new Intel vulnerabilites

2019-11-14 Thread haaber
Just a small comprehension question to the microkerel update shipped in the last xen update: are these microkernels "flashed" into some cpu memory, or are they re-run / setup at each boot again? Cheers, Bernhard -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups

Re: [qubes-users] Listing all available templates in a given repo

2019-11-14 Thread Charles Peters
On Tue, Nov 12, 2019 at 5:38 PM Dan Krol wrote: > Hello, > > *Caveat:* I'm fairly new to Qubes and Fedora. > > *Question:* How do I get a list of all available templates that I can > install under each repository? (i.e. "current", "testing", "community" etc) > I would also like to see a list of

[qubes-users] HCL Info - Dell Latitude E6520

2019-11-14 Thread Charles Peters
d an email to qubes-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/qubes-users/CAMet1z7FZz_fDVtsJycUUxmTrXGpscy3B1GV%2BXuMM-0u7hxnPg%40mail.gmail.com. Qubes-HCL-Dell_Inc_-Latitude_E6520-20191114-152124.yml Description: application/yaml

Re: [qubes-users] 2 new Intel vulnerabilites

2019-11-14 Thread Lorenzo Lamas
On Thursday, November 14, 2019 at 2:57:19 PM UTC+1, Andrew David Wong wrote: > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA512 > > On 2019-11-14 6:28 AM, Andrew David Wong wrote: > > On 2019-11-13 12:40 PM, Lorenzo Lamas wrote: > >> There are 2 new vulnerabilities in Intel CPU's, also

Re: [qubes-users] QSB #053: TSX Asynchronous Abort speculative side channel (XSA-305)

2019-11-14 Thread Chris Laprise
One of the packages came down with an incorrect signature: *** ERROR while receiving updates: Error while verifing kernel-4.19.82-1.pvops.qubes.x86_64.rpm signature: /var/lib/qubes/updates/rpm/kernel-4.19.82-1.pvops.qubes.x86_64.rpm: rsa sha1 (MD5) PGP MD5 NOT OK I'm not sure if that kernel

Re: [qubes-users] 2 new Intel vulnerabilites

2019-11-14 Thread Andrew David Wong
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 2019-11-14 6:28 AM, Andrew David Wong wrote: > On 2019-11-13 12:40 PM, Lorenzo Lamas wrote: >> There are 2 new vulnerabilities in Intel CPU's, also affecting >> Xen. Xen has issued XSA-304(CVE-2018-12207) and XSA >> 305(CVE-2019-11135). Is the

[qubes-users] QSB #053: TSX Asynchronous Abort speculative side channel (XSA-305)

2019-11-14 Thread Andrew David Wong
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Dear Qubes Community, We have just published Qubes Security Bulletin (QSB) #053: TSX Asynchronous Abort speculative side channel (XSA-305). The text of this QSB is reproduced below. This QSB and its accompanying signatures will always be available

[qubes-users] XSA-304 does not affect the security of Qubes OS

2019-11-14 Thread Andrew David Wong
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Dear Qubes Community, The Xen Project has published Xen Security Advisory 304 (XSA-304). This XSA does *not* affect the security of Qubes OS, and no user action is necessary. This XSA has been added to the XSA Tracker:

Re: [qubes-users] 2 new Intel vulnerabilites

2019-11-14 Thread Chris Laprise
On 11/14/19 7:28 AM, Andrew David Wong wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 2019-11-13 12:40 PM, Lorenzo Lamas wrote: There are 2 new vulnerabilities in Intel CPU's, also affecting Xen. Xen has issued XSA-304(CVE-2018-12207) and XSA 305(CVE-2019-11135). Is the Qubes team

Re: [qubes-users] 2 new Intel vulnerabilites

2019-11-14 Thread Andrew David Wong
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 2019-11-13 12:40 PM, Lorenzo Lamas wrote: > There are 2 new vulnerabilities in Intel CPU's, also affecting Xen. > Xen has issued XSA-304(CVE-2018-12207) and XSA 305(CVE-2019-11135). > Is the Qubes team aware yet? I haven't seen a new QSB. > Yes,

[qubes-users] Intel's continued security meltdown, MDS edition:

2019-11-14 Thread Chris Laprise
From Kim Zetter at the New York Times: https://twitter.com/KimZetter/status/1194374230109868032 When Intel released patch for CPU vulns last May, it said the patch fixed all the vulns. But researchers at @vu5ec say this isn't true and Intel knew it. Intel asked them not to disclose this and