WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
   
 
 
Xen 
 
Home Products Support Community News
 
   
 

xen-users

RE: [Xen-users] Xen Security

To: "Bart Coninckx" <bart.coninckx@xxxxxxxxxx>, <xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: [Xen-users] Xen Security
From: "Jonathan Tripathy" <jonnyt@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2010 11:41:23 +0100
Cc:
Delivery-date: Fri, 16 Jul 2010 03:43:51 -0700
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
List-help: <mailto:xen-users-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen user discussion <xen-users.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-users@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-users>, <mailto:xen-users-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-users>, <mailto:xen-users-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <4C3F905E.9030100@xxxxxxxxxxx> <201007161221.02660.bart.coninckx@xxxxxxxxxx> <46C13AA90DB8844DAB79680243857F0F0AFDBD@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <201007161239.15313.bart.coninckx@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thread-index: Acsk0yXI6XouZy2bQE6KrKEt4t75fQAAElze
Thread-topic: [Xen-users] Xen Security
 


From: Bart Coninckx [mailto:bart.coninckx@xxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Fri 16/07/2010 11:39
To: Jonathan Tripathy
Cc: xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [Xen-users] Xen Security

On Friday 16 July 2010 12:27:46 Jonathan Tripathy wrote:
> I think the challenges are bigger than with separate physicals boxes. You
>  have to approach from a theoretical point of view. It's not that because
>  there are no breaches or exploits today, that there will never be. The
>  theory is this: maximum seclusion is maximum security. Two separate boxes
>  in two separate networks in let's say two separate buildings (physical
>  security is also part of the game)  will be the most secure. Xen presents
>  an exception to this: the seclusion is created by software. In theory it
>  is the same thing as physical seclusion, until the software fails or is
>  compromised.
> Another thing is human error: you WILL make mistakes. One of those mistakes
> may open open the wrong port, erase the wrong LUN, bridge the wrong NIC.
>  I've done quite some security in my time and the biggest problem is always
>  human error. We need to humbly acknowledge this.
> In short: it's certainly a bigger risk, but the consequences of
>  compromising your server might lead you to accept this risk.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> -----------------------------
>
> I 100% agree with you on this :) By splitting things up, you can limit the
>  "damage zone".  And I can see what you mean about the human area - you
>  really need your head screwed on when working with all this stuff!
>
> Do people on this list generally trust Xen with their private data, mixed
>  with public VMs? The folks over at Slicehost, Amazon etc.. seem to...
>

I would be surprised if Amazon does this. Only their management stuff will be
connected to the pulbic infrastructure.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ah, sorry I wasn't suggesting that Amazon's web shop runs on their EC2 cloud. I was just simply stating that Amazon seem to trust Xen with a mixture of customer VMs, that's all

_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>