Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 10/16] SUPPORT.md: Add Debugging, analysis, crash post-portem

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

>>> On 21.11.17 at 19:19, <george.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> xentrace I would argue for security support; I've asked customers to
> send me xentrace data as part of analysis before.  I also know enough
> about it that I'm reasonably confident the risk of an attack vector is
> pretty low.

Knowing pretty little about xentrace I will trust you here. What I
was afraid of is that generally anything adding overhead can have
unintended side effects, the more with the - aiui - huge amounts of
data this may produce.

> I don't have a strong opinion on gdbsx; I'd call it 'supported', but if
> you think we need to exclude it from security support I'm happy with
> that as well.

Looks like on another sub-thread it was meanwhile already agreed
to mark it not security supported.

Jan


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel