Re: Black Hat: New database attack revealed

From: Dave Page <dpage(at)postgresql(dot)org>
To: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Black Hat: New database attack revealed
Date: 2007-08-02 13:01:32
Message-ID: 46B1D5AC.6080203@postgresql.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacy

Magnus Hagander wrote:
>> In our case, would it even be possible given WAL?
>
>>From how I read it they rely on the time to insert into BTREE indexes (or
> to lookup for unique keys etc). I don't see how WAL would change that (well
> the values changes, but you would still see timing differences in cases
> with lots-of-equal-keys-in-the-index or such things)

Yeah, my reasoning was a little screwed up - now corrected by Greg :-)

> But I'd say that the simple act of fsyncing after every commit would in
> most cases destroy any difference between these key lookups - that random
> element coming in from different platter locations would be much higher
> than the btree difference in my guess...

Yeah.

Regards, Dave.

In response to

Browse pgsql-advocacy by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Lukas Kahwe Smith 2007-08-02 13:20:09 Re: Black Hat: New database attack revealed
Previous Message Magnus Hagander 2007-08-02 12:39:07 Re: Black Hat: New database attack revealed