TE
TechEcho
Home24h TopNewestBestAskShowJobs
GitHubTwitter
Home

TechEcho

A tech news platform built with Next.js, providing global tech news and discussions.

GitHubTwitter

Home

HomeNewestBestAskShowJobs

Resources

HackerNews APIOriginal HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 TechEcho. All rights reserved.

Assessing Unikernel Security [pdf]

53 pointsby liuwabout 6 years ago

3 comments

tptacekabout 6 years ago
This paper is pretty excellent. In particular I sort of love that they included a &quot;Hypothesis&quot; section that laid out what their expectations about security were.<p>They set out to confirm a hunch that despite reducing attack surface by using stripped-down kernels, unikernel applications would be less secure than containerized applications because the unikernels would have relatively primitive runtime security, compared to Linux container systems which inherit two decades of countermeasure work.<p>They tested IncludeOS and Rumprun and found both to have approximately 1998-levels of runtime hardening. IncludeOS in particular was a steaming crater at the end; a stack overflow on IncludeOS could write directly into the (writeable!) program text, and the NULL page was writeable and executable.
评论 #19744030 未加载
jdcabout 6 years ago
Only covers Rumprun and IncludeOS - not Unikernels in general
评论 #19804274 未加载
tilt_errorabout 6 years ago
I assume Nabla and Solo5 would be scoring great in this (type of) test?
评论 #19746222 未加载