Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 21 Nov 2013 12:12:40 -0200
From:      Alexandre Biancalana <biancalana@gmail.com>
To:        Eitan Adler <lists@eitanadler.com>
Cc:        "freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org" <freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: VPS / Jail / Bhyve File System isolation
Message-ID:  <CAGF-nS5Sth20FtS-XGgQf_PkwrKFkCjW0U_SvJEkbxiBg7wX-Q@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAF6rxgmkUnyENS=_y-jCjnQdBqgeDX4K2xJh6SSJ=7syss3T=A@mail.gmail.com>
References:  <BLU179-W2710DC567151403C38377AC6E60@phx.gbl> <CAF6rxgmkUnyENS=_y-jCjnQdBqgeDX4K2xJh6SSJ=7syss3T=A@mail.gmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 12:48 AM, Eitan Adler <lists@eitanadler.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 12:55 PM, Bruno Lauz=E9 <brunolauze@msn.com> wrot=
e:
> >
> > Using jails, customers are uncomfortable with the fact documents can be
> accessed from the host with root access.Project VPS seems to isolate more
> the guest from the host but not as well as an hypervisor like bhyve. With
> an hypervisor what the client have is private, as long as the host can
> manage the disk, delete it,  but the information is kept private from the
> host.
> > Any suggestions how to offer jail, vps, or anything containers
> techniques with total file system isolation from the host, or the only wa=
y
> is to go hypervisor, with the performance and instances count penalty tha=
t
> goes with it?
>
> Untrusted hypervisors is an active area of academic research.
> However, any such scheme requires additional hardware support.
>
> If you are interested I can give you some papers to look at.


I'm interested, can you provide the links of the papers ?



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAGF-nS5Sth20FtS-XGgQf_PkwrKFkCjW0U_SvJEkbxiBg7wX-Q>