From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: About TLB in lower-level caches Newsgroups: comp.arch Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2006 15:23:23 -0700"Dale Morris" writes:
virtual address space had a segment table ... the address of which (aka segment-table-origin) was loaded into segment table register ... and which the hardware used to uniquely identify a virtual address space.
when segment register was changed, the hardware would check to see of the address (sto) was already in the TLB sto-stack. if not, one of the sto-stack entries was replaced and all the TLB-entries associated with the sto-stack entry were automatically purged.
The lower-end 370s tended to flush their complete TLB on every segment register switch.
the 165 implementation carried thru the 370/168 and into the 3033 (which started out being 168 wiring diagram mapped to faster chip technology). one of the people that went on to later be an itanium architect ... introduced "dual-address" space for the 3033 (instructions and support for directly accessing data in a different virtual address space). For some operations, this would double the number of active virtual address spaces and there were rumors at the time of significant sto-stack (and therefor tlb-entry) thrashing as a result.
misc. past posts mentioning sto-stack:
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/94.html#46 Rethinking Virtual Memory
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#204 Core (word usage) was anti-equipment etc
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000g.html#10 360/370 instruction cycle time
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001g.html#8 Test and Set (TS) vs Compare and Swap (CS)
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002c.html#40 using >=4GB of memory on a 32-bit processor
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002l.html#60 Handling variable page sizes?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003e.html#0 Resolved: There Are No Programs With >32 Bits of Text
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003g.html#12 Page Table - per OS/Process
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003g.html#13 Page Table - per OS/Process
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003g.html#23 price ov IBM virtual address box??
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003h.html#37 Does PowerPC 970 has Tagged TLBs (Address Space Identifiers)
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003m.html#29 SR 15,15
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005c.html#63 intel's Vanderpool and virtualization in general
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005h.html#11 Exceptions at basic block boundaries
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005h.html#18 Exceptions at basic block boundaries
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005r.html#44 What ever happened to Tandem and NonStop OS ?
801 was originally designed to be a much more closed, proprietary,
dedicated environment. instead of segment table and segment table
register, it had inverted tables and segment-identifiers.
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#801
romp in the early 80s, implemented a 12-bit segment identifier. romp had 32bit virtual addressing ... the top four bits mapping to one of sixteen segment registers. each segment register could have an arbitrary 12bit segment identifier value. To do virtual->real mapping, the hardware indexed a segment register (using the top four bits of the virtual address), took the 12-bit segment identifier from the segment register and then used to do a lookup in the TLB for the appropriate virtual page entry (i.e. using 12-bit segment identifier value, plus 16-bit virtual page number, within a segment). This was sometimes referred to as 40-bit virtual address (combination of the 12-bit segment identifier value plus 28bit virtual address). It was theoretically possible to have the same 12-bit segment identifier appear in each of the 16 segment registers ... which would result in 16 different possible (32bit) virtual addresses all mapping to the same TLB entry.
for rios/power, the segment identifier was doubled from 12bits to 24bits ... and you sometimes saw writeups describing the rios/power implementation as being 52-bit virtual addressing.
for some drift, the original virtual machine virtualization support in 360 (and later 370) ... created "shadow" segment and page table for a virtual machine (that translated from the virtual machine's "3rd" level virtual memory to the hardware's "1st" level real memory) that followed TLB (which happened to be called associative array on 360, somewhat more expensive and fully associative) hardware rules. Every time the virtual machine changed the virtual segment register, the shadow table entries would be completely reset (i.e. the low-end 370 hardware model). In the mid-70s an performance enhancement was implemented for virtual machine support that somewhat emulated the 168 sto-stack ... with multiple "shadow" tables possible for each virtual machine.
misc. past posts mentioning virtual machine shadow table support:
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/94.html#48 Rethinking Virtual Memory
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002l.html#51 Handling variable page sizes?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003g.html#18 Multiple layers of virtual address translation
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004c.html#35 Computer-oriented license plates
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004o.html#18 Integer types for 128-bit addressing
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005d.html#66 Virtual Machine Hardware
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005d.html#70 Virtual Machine Hardware
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005h.html#18 Exceptions at basic block boundaries
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005k.html#42 wheeler scheduler and hpo
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005n.html#47 Anyone know whether VM/370 EDGAR is still available anywhere?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005o.html#8 Non Power of 2 Cache Sizes
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005p.html#45 HASP/ASP JES/JES2/JES3
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: About TLB in lower-level caches Newsgroups: comp.arch Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2006 18:28:39 -0700Andy Glew writes:
and
had to go to the way-back machine for this one
https://web.archive.org/web/20000415125122/http://www.hpl.hp.com/features/bill_worley_interview.html
slightly related recent post
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006.html#39 What happens if CR's are directly changed
for some real topic drift .. a dc3 flight from h*** in the late 60s to
visit him at cornell for a meeting about HASP
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006b.html#27 IBM 610 workstation computer
other drift, after some number of people left for the labs in early 80s, i was getting frequent emails polling who else did i know that might be joining them and/or whether i might also join them.
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: When *not* to sign an e-mail message? Newsgroups: sci.crypt,comp.security.pgp.discuss Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2006 10:06:29 -0700Andrew Swallow writes:
pin-debit has had two-factor authentication, the card as something
you have and the pin as something you know ... from 3-factor
authentication model
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subintegrity.html#3factor
• something you have
• something you know
• something you are
with the standard pin-debit POS operation, you swipe your card
(something you have authentication) and enter your pin (something
you know authentication, pin/password shared-secrets can be
considered countermeasure to lost/stolen cards).
the POS then displays the value and asks you to press a yes/agree button as a demonstration of intent (the equivalent of the "human signature").
slight topic drift on the chip&pin subject:
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm22.htm#20 FraudWatch - Chip&Pin, a new tenner
slightly more drift mentioning chip&pin:
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006d.html#31 Caller ID "spoofing"
in the magstripe generation of cards ... reading the magstripe was proof of something you have authentication. however, the magstripe was "static data" and was subject to skimming/evesdropping vulnerabilities and became fairly straight-forward to generate counterfeit cards from the "static data".
the chip&pin is substituting public key and digital signature operation in lieu of reading magstripe ... as proof of something you have authentication (with the pin still something you know authentication as countermeasure to lost/stolen card). however, the authentication processes (including digital signature) are orthogonal to establishing "intent" established by requiring somebody to press a button (the "intent" equivalence that is also addressed by human signature).
lengthy discussion, including use of public key and digital
signatures for establishing proof of something you have
authentication hardware token:
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006d.html#41 Caller ID "spoofing"
past posts in this thread ... including discussion of POS pressing
button as evidence of intent (i.e. human signature) separate
from authentication processes:
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006d.html#32 When *not* to sign an e-mail message?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006d.html#33 When *not* to sign an e-mail message?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006d.html#34 When *not* to sign an e-mail message?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006d.html#36 When *not* to sign an e-mail message?
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: When *not* to sign an e-mail message? Newsgroups: sci.crypt,comp.security.pgp.discuss Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2006 13:17:22 -0700Anne & Lynn Wheeler writes:
in the above yes card scenarios, i've seen reference to a number of different implementations.
the yes card scenarios supposedly are "static data" exploits ... i.e. the token authenticates itself by presenting a digital certificate (i.e. static data) to the terminal. the terminal verifies the digital signature on the certificate and accepts the card as authenticated. this turned out to be vulnerable to the same skimming technology that has been used for magstripes. there is some more detailed information at the URL cited by the posting mentioned above.
the countermeasure becomes "dynamic data" ... the terminal basically sends a form of challenge, which is digitally signed and both the digital signature and the digital certificate is returned. the terminal now verifies the digital signature on the digital certificate and uses the public key in the digital certificate to verify the digital signature on the challenge.
i've heard rumors of mitm-attacks tho ... since the digital signature on the challenge and the execution of the transaction are separate, distinct operations. the countermeasure for mitm-attack is to directly digitally sign the transaction ... as opposed to having separate operation for token digital signature authentication and the execution of the transaction.
this then starts to look much more like the x9.59 model
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/x959.html#x959
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subpubkey.html#x959
the original work on x9.59 for directly digitally signing the transaction was going on in the same time-frame as the original work on the definition for th chip&pin stuff ... where authentication was going to be done separately from the transaction.
in any case, as in past posts on the subject, the verification of the digital signature establishes the implication of something you have authentication (aka the entity has access to and use of the corresponding private key). then some certified process that binds a private key to some chip ... then sort of establishes the equivalence between something you have private key and something you have chip.
however, digital signature isn't being used to imply intent as in human signatures ... or in the human button pressing operation in response to some message (as in POS terminal).
any change from doing a digital signature on a purely challenge (possibly random data) authentication operation ... to applying a digital signature to the transaction itself ... wouldn't be to create any more of a (false) impression of human signature ... but to close possible mitm-attacks that might be possible between doing an independent authentication operation and then doing a separate transaction (aka one of the original x9.59 countermeasure scenarios).
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: When *not* to sign an e-mail message? Newsgroups: sci.crypt,comp.security.pgp.discuss Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2006 13:33:46 -0700"nemo_outis" writes:
however, if you look at the contrast between signature-debit and pin-debit .... signature-debit is effectively treated as a credit card transaction from the standpoint of fraud ... while pin-debit is considered to be two-factor authentication ... possibly lower fraud (modulo the issue that it is possible for some skimming technology to simultaneously capture both the magstripe and the pin ... defeating some basic assumptions with multi-factor authentication that the different factors are subject to independent threats/vulnerabilities).
POS terminals for pin-debit, w/o the signature and straight two-factor authentication ... then goes to the interaction with a message being displayed asking for the person to press a button to establish "intent" (which is otherwise provided by a human signature).
within 3-factor authentication model ... human signature would possible be something you are, since it is it would be taken as distinctive representation of human physical characteristics.
however, there aren't a lot of current infrastructure deployments that take human signatures as part of serious multi-factor authentication infrastructure (not that you can't do it, it just doesn't seem to be taken very seriously).
there was some work on elevating writing a signature to status of acceptable something you are authentication .... it wasn't so much the resulting signature ... but that the physical motions in executing the signature have been demonstrated to be distinctive.
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: About TLB in lower-level caches Newsgroups: comp.arch Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2006 13:56:17 -0700Anne & Lynn Wheeler writes:
for some additional drift ... there was actually quite a bit of work put into the original 370 virtual memory architecture that allowed for TLBs hardware implementations to be
1) simple, clear all entries, whenever switching address space
2) "sto-associative" ... this is from the above description, basically TLB entries were associated with a "STO", segment table origin ... i.e. the real address of the start of segment table (which was unique definition for a virtual address space).
3) "pto-associative" ... this is page-table origin associative.
370 had a virtual address space segment table with segment entries that were pointers to the start of individual page tables (containing page table entries mapping specific virtual page to real page address). 370 architecture allowed for shared segments (i.e. the same page table pointed to by different segment tables ... same page-table appearing in different virtual address spaces).
I don't know of any general TLB hardware implementations that actually did general pto-associative (i.e. multiple different address spaces would have shared segment addresses mapping to the same TLB entries).
In effect, the 801 implementation (described in the original post) is a flavor of pto-associative ... but for an inverted page table architecture. since you don't have an explicit table, there is no explicit table start address to uniquely identify each segment ... therefor the definition of arbitrary 12-bit segment identifier (in romp) ... and later expanded to 24-bit segment identifier (for rios/power).
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: About TLB in lower-level caches Newsgroups: comp.arch Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2006 19:38:47 -0700"Eric P." writes:
the original 370 virtual memory architecture included hardware instructions, IPTE (invalidate page table entry), ISTE (invalidate segment table entry), and PTLB (purge table look-aside buffer). IPTE turns the invalid bit in the PTE entry and would flush any associated TLB entry. ISTE turns the invalid bit in the STE entry and would flush any associated TLB entries. PTLB flushes all TLB entries. IPTE and ISTE instructions were dropped from original shipped products.
various web pages (from search engine) with more detailed discussion
about virtual machine implementation and shadow tables
http://www.cap-lore.com/Software/virtualVirtual.html
http://www.cs.duke.edu/~narten/110/nachos/main/node34.html
http://www.virtualization.info/archive/2005_01_01_archive.html
http://lists.xensource.com/archives/html/xen-devel/2004-08/msg00261.html
https://www.leeandmelindavarian.com/Melinda/25paper.pdf
http://swpat.ffii.org/pikta/txt/ep/0171/475/
http://www.cs.princeton.edu/courses/archive/spring06/cos592/bib/future_trends-rosenblum.pdf
http://www.stanford.edu/class/cs240/readings/waldspurger.pdf
http://download.microsoft.com/download/9/8/f/98f3fe47-dfc3-4e74-92a3-088782200fe7/TWSE05008_WinHEC05.ppt
http://www.stanford.edu/~talg/papers/COMPUTER05/virtual-future-computer05.pdf
http://www.usenix.org/events/osdi02/tech/waldspurger/waldspurger_html/node3.html
http://www.vmware.com/pdf/esx2_performance_implications.pdf
http://www.cs.ubc.ca/~norm/cs538a/ibmrd2706L.pdf
http://www.cs.wisc.edu/~stjones/proj/vm_reading/ibmrd2706L.pdf
http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/4814975.html
http://www.uic.edu/depts/accc/inform/ibmglossary.html
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: About TLB in lower-level caches Newsgroups: comp.arch Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2006 11:49:35 -0700Anne & Lynn Wheeler writes:
one of the people at the grenoble science center got an assignment
at the cambridge science center
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#545tech
and while on the assignment, added 360/67 virtual machine support to cp/67 (including the original shadow table support).
this was not too long before the joint cambridge/endicott ("cp67h" and "cp67i") project started to provide 370 virtual machine support under 360/67. 370s were originally announced w/o virtual memory support, but the architecture had been defined. the 370 virtual memory architecture had some number of differences from that found in 360/67 including some differences in the definition for the segment and page tables (used by the hardware).
for the "cp67h" level changes to cp/67 ... there was mode-switch defining whether 360/67 virtual memory was being emulated or 370 virtual memory was being emulated. the "shadow tables" were the same format ... since they were being referenced by the real 360/67 hardware ... however, the segment and page tables that were in the memory of the virtual machine ... which the cp/67 simulation worked with ... were slightly different (but both formats need to be translated to native hardware format for shadow tables).
minor trivia, some years later the person that had done the
original virtualizing 360/67 and shadow table support found
himself setting up EARN ... reference:
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001h.html#65
misc. past posts mention "cp67h" and "cp67i" work (it was up and
running standard production ... a year before the first engineering
370 machine with virtual memory support was operational ... and well
before virtual memory for 370 was announced, other trivia, the
multi-level source update process was also developed as part of the
"cp67h" and "cp67i" effort)
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002h.html#50 crossreferenced program code listings
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002j.html#0 HONE was .. Hercules and System/390 - do we need it?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002j.html#70 hone acronym (cross post)
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004b.html#31 determining memory size
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004d.html#74 DASD Architecture of the future
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004h.html#27 Vintage computers are better than modern crap !
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004p.html#50 IBM 3614 and 3624 ATM's
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005c.html#59 intel's Vanderpool and virtualization in general
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005d.html#58 Virtual Machine Hardware
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005d.html#66 Virtual Machine Hardware
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005g.html#17 DOS/360: Forty years
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005h.html#18 Exceptions at basic block boundaries
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005i.html#39 Behavior in undefined areas?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005j.html#50 virtual 360/67 support in cp67
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005p.html#27 What ever happened to Tandem and NonStop OS ?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005p.html#45 HASP/ASP JES/JES2/JES3
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006.html#38 Is VIO mandatory?
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: Beginner's Pubkey Crypto Question Newsgroups: sci.crypt Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2006 16:45:31 -0700Kristian Gjøsteen <kristiag+news@item.ntnu.no> writes:
if the whistle-blower signed the unencrypted message, sent the encrypted message, the digital signature and the public key .. mitm-attack replacing the digital signature and public key doesn't work because the mitm doesn't have access to the original unsigned message ... this basically impacts the integrity of the overall message. removing the signature and public key can be done ... but if the contents is kept confidential, then only the sender and the recipient have knowledge of the contents ... which could be used to substantiate future messages from the same entity.
another scenario is including the digital signature as part of plain-test message before encryption ... so that it is encrypted along with the rest of the message. in any case, responses can be posted to public place which have been encrypted with the original public key (only after there is high level of confidence that the public key being used, has a trust chain that uniquely binds it to the original message).
a similar, but different sequence cropped up over the definition and
use of the non-repudiation bit in digital certificates. basically you
have message (unencrypted or encrypted) with digital signature and
digital certificate attached. recent thread also mentioning
non-repudiation:
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006d.html#32 When *not* to sign an e-mail message?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006d.html#36 When *not* to sign an e-mail message?
now lets say you have two different digital certificates for the same public key ... one with the non-repudiation bit set and one w/o the non-repudiation bit set. you intend to only authenticate some data; package up the message, the digital signature, and the digital certificate with the non-repudiation bit OFF and send it. however, there is no proof which digital certificate you actually attached to the package. the recipient wants to hold you to higher liability ... so they scour the internet for a copy of you digital certificate with the non-repudiation bit set ON ... and in some dispute, present the original message, the original digital signature, and the substituted digital certificate (the one with the non-repudiation bit set ON). basic digital certificate standards didn't appear to anticipate this sort of threat (in part because there was enormous confusion about the non-repudiation bit ... and whether it carried with it additional obligations).
this scenario sort of cropped up in the mid-90s with one of the efforts to do a digitally signed payment transaction that included attached digital certificate (as opposed to certificate-less operation). One flyer to try and induce merchants to deploy implementations ... was a suggestion that if consumers were to attach digital certificates that included the non-repudiation bit having been set ON, it would reverse the burden of proof in any dispute (currently in any such dispute, the burden of proof is on the merchant ... not the consumer).
A possible vulnerability for consumers that didn't want to attach digital certificates with the non-repudiation bit set (and have the burden of proof shifted to themselves in a dispute) was that the protocol provided for no proof of the contents of attached digital certificate (merchants could reduce their costs by attempting to conjure up any valid digital certificate for the consumer's public key, that included the non-repudiation bit). This approach was eventually discredited along with most of the other hypothetical suggestions for the non-repudiation bit in digital certificate (aka it wasn't in the consumer's interest to claim non-repudiation, however it was proposed that it would become in the merchant's interest to show that they had a non-repudiation certificate for each consumer).
Of course that wasn't the only problem facing the certificate-based
digitally signed payment transactions efforts. They had realized
by that time that the x.509 identity certificate standards stuff
represented significant privacy and liability issues ... so they
had already retrenched to relying-party-only certificates
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subpubkey.html#rpo
basically the financial institution takes in all the information and records it in an account record (including any issued digital certificate and associated public key). they then issue a relying-party-only certicate which fundamentally contains only the account number and the public key. whenever somebody does a payment transaction ... they would include in the payment transaction all the standard, necessary information in the transaction, digitally sign it ... and send off the transaction, the digital signature and the relying-party-only ceritifcate attached.
the financial institution retrieves the account number from the transaction, reads the account record, uses the public key from the account record to verify the digital signature and discards the attached digital certificate. It wasn't that the attached digital certificate was just redundant and superfluous ... but it also resulted in enormous payload bloat. The typical 8583 payment transaction is on the order of 60-80 bytes. The digital certificate attachment overhead (even for relying-party-only certificates) was running 4k to 12k bytes (an enormous payload bloat of two orders of magnitude, increasing transaction payload by a factor of 100 times for something that was useless, redundant and superfluous).
the enormous digital certificate payload bloat was perceived as a significant issue and the X9F financial standards group started a project to define a compressed digital certificate standard for financial transactions ... hoping to get digital certificate payload down into the 300 byte range. One of the things that seemed to give them the most benefit was to eliminate digital certificate fields that were common across all the relying-party-only consumer certificates issued by the same financial institution. I suggested to them that they could even go further, not only could they eliminate all common fields ... but using some basic principles of information theory, they could eliminate all fields in the digital certificate that were already in possession of the financial institution.
I was quickly able to show that it was possible to come up with a digital certificate standard for zero-byte digital certificates. This seemed to have significant benefit ... being able to attach zero-byte digital certificates to every transaction, which turned out to be useless, redundant and superfluous anyway (since the financial institution was going to simply discard them immediately, already having a copy of all the original information stored in the account record). It seemed to be much more acceptable to demonstrate that useless, redundant and superfluous zero-byte digital certificates were being attached to every payment transaction (as opposed to saying that there was no point to attach useless, redundant and superfluous digital certificates at all).
misc. past posts about zero-byte digital certificate effort
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsmore.htm#client4 Client-side revocation checking capability
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000f.html#15 Why trust root CAs ?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001c.html#58 PKI and Non-repudiation practicalities
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001g.html#65 PKI/Digital signature doesn't work
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001i.html#16 Net banking, is it safe???
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004d.html#7 Digital Signature Standards
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004j.html#6 New Method for Authenticated Public Key Exchange without Digital Certificates
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004j.html#7 New Method for Authenticated Public Key Exchange without Digital Certificates
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004j.html#8 New Method for Authenticated Public Key Exchange without Digital Certificates
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004j.html#9 Smart card Authentification
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005n.html#33 X509 digital certificate for offline solution
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005o.html#31 Is symmetric key distribution equivalent to symmetric key generation?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006c.html#35 X.509 and ssh
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm22.htm#4 GP4.3 - Growth and Fraud - Case #3 - Phishing
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: terminals was: Caller ID "spoofing" Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2006 11:05:01 -0700eugene@cse.ucsc.edu (Eugene Miya) writes:
the monster displays were the GE/CALMAs ... found in some of vlsi chip
design operations. Used embedded HYPERchannel A400 adapters to provide
local area network for cluster of CALMAs. a couple past posts
mentioning CALMAs
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002g.html#55 Multics hardware (was Re: "Soul of a New Machine" Computer?)
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005r.html#24 What ever happened to Tandem and NonStop OS ?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005u.html#6 Fast action games on System/360+?
a few past posts mentioning 3277ga ... saw some use in some of the
internal vlsi chip shops as less expensive CALMAs
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001f.html#49 any 70's era supercomputers that ran as slow as today's supercompu
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001i.html#51 DARPA was: Short Watson Biography
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002p.html#29 Vector display systems
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004l.html#27 Shipwrecks
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004l.html#32 Shipwrecks
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004m.html#8 Whatever happened to IBM's VM PC software?
for some drift, lots of posts mentioning various HYPERchannel activities
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subnetwork.html#hsdt
for other drift ... collection of posts about taking interdata/3,
adding mainframe channel card and programming it to emulate mainframe
terminal controller. went thru several generations ... and later
Perkin-Elmer bought Interdata and they continued to be marketed under
the Perkin-Elmer brand
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/submain.html#360pcm
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: Caller ID "spoofing" Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2006 12:03:20 -0700Anne & Lynn Wheeler writes:
note that pin is part of shared-secret infrastructure.
from 3-factor authentication,
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subintegrity.html#3factor
• something you have
• something you know
• something you are
where multi-factor is considered more secure if the different factors
are subject to different threats/vulnerabilities. pins (something you
know) were somewhat countermeasures to lost/stolen card (something
you have). however, reading magstripe on the card was
representation/proof of unique something you have. by the early 90s,
skimming technology was starting to appear that represented a common
threat to both pins (something you know) and cards (reading
magstripe to establish proof of something you have).
discussion of some vulnerability characteristics
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm22.htm#20
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006e.html#3
some URLs from earlier in the week about current attacks on
PINs
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm22.htm#21
some URLs from today on PIN attacks:
PIN Scandal 'Worst Hack Ever'
http://yro.slashdot.org/yro/06/03/11/0543249.shtml
Worldwide Wave of Debit Card Fraud
http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,125053,00.asp
Debit-card fraud continues
http://www.securityfocus.com/brief/160
New Theft Scam Targets Debit Cards
http://www.wsfa.com/Global/story.asp?S=4615928&nav=0RdDcDuj
Worldwide Wave of Debit Card Fraud
http://www.hackinthebox.org/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=19588
basically all 3-factor types can use static data authentication mechanisms ... i.e. information that can be recorded and later reproduced for fraudulent purposes. this falls under the general category of replay attacks. for multi-factor authentication to be effective, different factors need to be subject to different threat/vulnerabilities. in the case of the general category of replay attacks ... at least one of the factors needs to be resistant to recording and later replay/reproduction.
this analysis can also be approached from the standpoint of
availability and "no-single-point-of-failure" ... although in this
case it is more like "no-single-point-of-attack". misc. collected
posts on high-availability
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#hacmp
misc. other past posts mentioning static data and/or replay
attack threats/vulnerabilities.:
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm12.htm#6 NEWS: 3D-Secure and Passport
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm13.htm#27 How effective is open source crypto?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm13.htm#28 How effective is open source crypto? (addenda)
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm13.htm#29 How effective is open source crypto? (bad form)
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm13.htm#31 How effective is open source crypto? (bad form)
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm14.htm#30 Maybe It's Snake Oil All the Way Down
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm15.htm#25 WYTM?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm15.htm#36 VS: On-line signature standards
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm16.htm#13 The PAIN mnemonic
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm16.htm#22 Ousourced Trust (was Re: Difference between TCPA-Hardware and a smart card and something else before
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm17.htm#2 Difference between TCPA-Hardware and a smart card (was: example: secure computing kernel needed)
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm17.htm#13 A combined EMV and ID card
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm17.htm#38 Study: ID theft usually an inside job
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm17.htm#46 authentication and authorization (was: Question on the state of the security industry)
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm17.htm#47 authentication and authorization ... addenda
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm17.htm#50 authentication and authorization (was: Question on the state of the security industry)
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm17.htm#51 authentication and authorization
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm17.htm#55 Using crypto against Phishing, Spoofing and Spamming
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm18.htm#6 dual-use digital signature vulnerability
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm19.htm#5 Do You Need a Digital ID?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm19.htm#7 JIE - Contracts in Cyberspace
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm19.htm#18 Citibank discloses private information to improve security
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm19.htm#27 Citibank discloses private information to improve security
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm19.htm#41 massive data theft at MasterCard processor
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm19.htm#43 massive data theft at MasterCard processor
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm19.htm#45 payment system fraud, etc
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm19.htm#46 the limits of crypto and authentication
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm19.htm#47 the limits of crypto and authentication
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm20.htm#1 Keeping an eye on ATM fraud
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm20.htm#41 Another entry in the internet security hall of shame
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm21.htm#16 PKI too confusing to prevent phishing, part 28
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm22.htm#1 GP4.3 - Growth and Fraud - Case #3 - Phishing
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm22.htm#2 GP4.3 - Growth and Fraud - Case #3 - Phishing
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm22.htm#5 long-term GPG signing key
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm22.htm#7 long-term GPG signing key
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001b.html#43 John Mashey's greatest hits
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001d.html#20 What is PKI?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002m.html#14 fingerprint authentication
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003g.html#70 Simple resource protection with public keys
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003j.html#25 Idea for secure login
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003m.html#50 public key vs passwd authentication?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003o.html#3 Bank security question (newbie question)
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003o.html#4 Bank security question (newbie question)
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003p.html#6 Does OTP need authentication?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004b.html#43 The SOB that helped IT jobs move to India is dead!
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004b.html#44 Foiling Replay Attacks
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004b.html#45 Foiling Replay Attacks
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004f.html#31 MITM attacks
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004h.html#21 Basics of key authentication
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004i.html#21 New Method for Authenticated Public Key Exchange without Digital Certificates
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004q.html#0 Single User: Password or Certificate
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005e.html#31 Public/Private key pair protection on Windows
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005f.html#62 single-signon with X.509 certificates
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005g.html#33 Good passwords and security priorities
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005g.html#46 Maximum RAM and ROM for smartcards
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005g.html#48 "Best practices" or "Best implementations"?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005g.html#51 Security via hardware?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005i.html#1 Brit banks introduce delays on interbank xfers due to phishing boom
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005j.html#64 More on garbage
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005m.html#15 Course 2821; how this will help for CISSP exam ?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005m.html#37 public key authentication
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005m.html#55 54 Processors?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005o.html#42 Catch22. If you cannot legally be forced to sign a document etc - Tax Declaration etc etc etc
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005p.html#2 Innovative password security
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005q.html#23 Logon with Digital Siganture (PKI/OCES - or what else they're called)
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005s.html#52 TTP and KCM
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005t.html#28 RSA SecurID product
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005t.html#34 RSA SecurID product
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005t.html#52 PGP Lame question
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005u.html#1 PGP Lame question
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005u.html#31 AMD to leave x86 behind?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005u.html#33 PGP Lame question
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005v.html#2 ABN Tape - Found
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005v.html#3 ABN Tape - Found
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006d.html#31 Caller ID "spoofing"
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006d.html#32 When *not* to sign an e-mail message?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006d.html#41 Caller ID "spoofing"
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006e.html#2 When *not* to sign an e-mail message?
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: Caller ID "spoofing" Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2006 13:46:48 -0700Anne & Lynn Wheeler writes:
sort of trivial example was when we started work on ha/cmp project, there was a detailed vulnerability analysis (including tc/ip). nearly ten years later, the largest online service provider had been fighting a tcp/ip vulnerability for a couple months and nobody (that they had brought in so far) had been able to identify it. one day, one of the people caught me after work and offered to buy me a hamburger while he explained the problem. it turned out to be a relatively trivial (but somewhat obscure) vulnerability that we had identified nearly ten years earlier. a couple scribbled instructions that they applied later that night was a quick&dirty fix for the problem.
a couple minor past refrences to the incident:
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aepay3.htm#aadsrel1 AADS related information
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005c.html#51 [Lit.] Buffer overruns
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: About TLB in lower-level caches Newsgroups: comp.arch Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2006 15:03:24 -0700"Eric P." writes:
table 1:
the virtual machine operating system is running virtual address space ... which requires a mapping between what the operating system (kernel) running in the virtual machine thinks are the virtual address space mappings to what it thinks are its real addresses.
table 2:
the hypervisor running on the real hardware has a set of virtual address tables for each virtual machine ... which gives the mapping between what the virtual machine operating thinks are "real addresses" (but in reallity are virtual addresses) and the "real", "real" addresses of the real hardware.
when the hypervisor (providing virtual machines capability) running on the real hardware ... dispatches a virtual machine ... the virtual machine may be expecting to run it real address mode of the virtual machine (in which case, the hypervisor loads the "table 2" into the appropriate hardware registers.
table 3 (shadow table):
when the hypervisor (providing virtual machines capability) running on the real hardware ... dispatches a virtual machine ... the virtual machine may be expecting to run it virtual address mode of the virtual machine. The virtual machine has specified "table 1" for running. However, since "table 1" only provide address mapping from the virtual address space mapping (maintained by the kernel running in the virtual machine) to the virtual machine's "real addresses" ... and since the virtual machine's "real addresses" aren't in fact the real machine's real addresses ... using "table 1" would produce invalid results.
as a result, the hypervisor running on the real hardware builds a shadow of "table 1" ... which goes thru a double mapping. It takes an entry from "table 1", and translates the virtual machine "real address", using "table 2" to get the real, real address on the real machine ... and places that value in the corresponding entry in the "shadow table" (shadow of table 1).
the rules for maintaining the hardware TLB are followed for maintaining the shadow of "table 1". This is because, in part because the TLB architecture is defined as also being a shadow/copy of "table 1" (for the virtual machine) ... and can result in incorrect and/or unpredictable results if the values in the TLB aren't kept in sync with the values in entries from "table 1". The virtual machine hypervisor takes advantage of the shadow/copy characteristics of the real hardware TLB ... for maintaining the entries in the "shadow" of "table 1". Note however, the "shadow table" (with translated shadow/copy entries from "table 1") has to maintained consistent with both the "table 1" entries as well as "table 2" entries.
the original shadow table implementation had only a single physical set of storage for a shadow table for each virtual machine. This corresponded with hardware tlb implementations that only remembered entries for the current address space ... and didn't have capability for remembering entries for multiple different address spaces. in this implementation, every time there is a virtual address space change ... all the existing hardware tlb entries have to be flushed. Simiarily, in the single shadaw table (per virtual machine) implementation (where only entries for a single virtual address space is remembered), every time the virtual machine changes virtual address space, all entries in the shadow table are flushed (faithfully emulating what is done by hardware TLBs).
later shadow table implementations provided for having additional storage allocated per virtual machine for remembering entries from multiple different virtual address spaces (for a specific virtual machine). this corresponds (and emulates) hardware tlbs that remember entries from multiple differen virtual address spaces (multiple "table 1" per virtual machine). In this scenario ... there are a fixed, maximum amount of fixed storage for shadow tables ... analogous to the 370/165 TLB description of being STO-associative and having a seven-sto stack (can remember entries for up to seven different virtual address spaces simultaneously). However, analogous to the 370/165 TLB description ... when a new address space is loaded that doesn't correspond to one of the (saved) shadow tables ... and all the existing physical shadow tables are already associated with a specific "table 1" ... then one of the existing shadow tables has to have all its entries flushed and that specific shadow table re-allocated to the new virtual address space for the virtual machine (new "table 1" for the virtual machine). Akin this emulates the rules for maintaining hardware TLB entries.
Now, newer hardware with additional capability could provide virtual machine hardware support for hardware TLB miss ... where the TLB miss processing and TLB entry load ... recognizes that it is running in virtual machine mode ... and that the hardware has to go thru a two level lookup before obtaining the real, real address; aka this takes the virtual real address entry from "table 1", does a 2nd lookup using "table 2" ... in order to obtain, the real, real address (as opposed to the virtual, real address) for loading into the real hardware TLB entry.
The shadow table description is where the TLB hardware doesn't have direct hardware support for doing the two-level table lookup (doing the lookup in the virtual machine's Table1 ... and then doing a 2nd lookup in the hypervisor's Table2 in order to obtain the real, real hardware address) ... and the two-level lookup is done in software on behalf of the hardware TLB ... and then when running that specific virtual address space ... the hardware really runs using the "shadow table" (when the hardware TLB implementation doesn't directly support virtual machine operation mode and performing a two level lookup automagically in hardware).
There is also a gotcha for any shadow-table bypass and virtual machine hardware TLB two-level entry-miss & entry-load implementation and that is recursive implementation. Part of early virtual machine work was running a test virtual machine hypervisor under a production virtual mahcine hypervisor ... where a guest virtual memory operating system was being tested in the test virtual machine hypervisor. Now you have three levels of tables (and, in theory, recursive might work to any level). In the three level scenario:
virtual address space "LEVEL-1" running in virtual machine defined by virtual address space "TABLE-1" of a operating system running in a virtual machine
virtual address space "LEVEL-2" which the virtual machine operating system thinks are real address, but is really defined by "TABLE-2" of a virtual machine hypervisor "A" that thinks it is running on real hardware
virtual address space "LEVEL-3" which the virtual machine hypervisor "A" thinks are real address, but is really defined by "TABLE-3" of a virtual machine hypervisor "B" that may or may not be running on real hardware.
Now the real TLB hardware (that doesn't have any builtin two-level lookup virtual machine capability) is expecting real virtual address space tables to provide mapping from virtual address space to real, real addresses (virtual page number to real, real page number).
The problem with "TABLE-1" defining virtual address space "LEVEL-1" is not providing mapping between virtual addresses and the real, real hardware page numbers ... "TABLE-1" entries provide mapping between virtual addess space "LEVEL-1" and virtual address space "LEVEL-2" ... the mapping defined by "TABLE-2" (not the real, real hardware addresses). Furthermore, the problem with "TABLE-2" is that doesn't actually provide the mapping between virtual address space "LEVEL-2" and the real, real hardware page numbers ... but it provides the mapping between virtual address space "LEVEL-2" and the virtual address space "LEVEL-3" defined by "TABLE-3". If this is truely recursive ... it isn't until you get to "LEVEL-n" that you really have a "TABLE-n" that is actually providing any mapping between a virtual address space and the real, real page numbers.
So to generalize this, the virtual machine hypervisor at LEVEL-n, builds shadow tables (that emulate the semantics of real hardware TLBs) for virtual machine virtual address tables at LEVEL-(n-1). The virtual machine hypervisor shadow tables emulate the virtual address space tables at LEVEL-(n-1) but using what it believes to be real addresses at LEVEL-n. If the virtual machine hypervisor is really running in a virtual machine recursive environment ... there could be several generations of shadow tables ... each providing for converting the virtual, real page numbers at level (n-1) into page numbers of level (n). It isn't until you get to the very bottom, real hardware level do you finally encounter a shadow table that might get loaded into the real, real hardware registers ... because it actually is the only table that contains the real, real page numbers.
lots of past references to shadow tables
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/94.html#48 Rethinking Virtual Memory
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002l.html#51 Handling variable page sizes?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003g.html#18 Multiple layers of virtual address translation
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004c.html#35 Computer-oriented license plates
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004o.html#18 Integer types for 128-bit addressing
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005d.html#66 Virtual Machine Hardware
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005d.html#70 Virtual Machine Hardware
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005h.html#18 Exceptions at basic block boundaries
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005k.html#42 wheeler scheduler and hpo
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005n.html#47 Anyone know whether VM/370 EDGAR is still available anywhere?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005o.html#8 Non Power of 2 Cache Sizes
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005p.html#45 HASP/ASP JES/JES2/JES3
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006e.html#0 About TLB in lower-level caches
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006e.html#6 About TLB in lower-level caches
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006e.html#7 About TLB in lower-level caches
various web pages (from search engine) with more detailed discussion
about virtual machine implementation and shadow tables
http://www.cap-lore.com/Software/virtualVirtual.html
http://www.cs.duke.edu/~narten/110/nachos/main/node34.html
http://www.virtualization.info/archive/2005_01_01_archive.html
http://lists.xensource.com/archives/html/xen-devel/2004-08/msg00261.html
https://www.leeandmelindavarian.com/Melinda/25paper.pdf
http://swpat.ffii.org/pikta/txt/ep/0171/475/
http://www.cs.princeton.edu/courses/archive/spring06/cos592/bib/future_trends-rosenblum.pdf
http://www.stanford.edu/class/cs240/readings/waldspurger.pdf
http://download.microsoft.com/download/9/8/f/98f3fe47-dfc3-4e74-92a3-088782200fe7/TWSE05008_WinHEC05.ppt
http://www.stanford.edu/~talg/papers/COMPUTER05/virtual-future-computer05.pdf
http://www.usenix.org/events/osdi02/tech/waldspurger/waldspurger_html/node3.html
http://www.vmware.com/pdf/esx2_performance_implications.pdf
http://www.cs.ubc.ca/~norm/cs538a/ibmrd2706L.pdf
http://www.cs.wisc.edu/~stjones/proj/vm_reading/ibmrd2706L.pdf
http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/4814975.html
http://www.uic.edu/depts/accc/inform/ibmglossary.html
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: X.509 and ssh Newsgroups: comp.security.ssh Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2006 20:25:19 -0700"Richard E. Silverman" writes:
the referenced phd thesis analyzes my computer communications in several hundred pages ... lot more detail than i could ever supply ... if you are truely interested.
misc. related postings on computer mediated communication
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subnetwork.html#cmc
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: X.509 and ssh Newsgroups: comp.security.ssh Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2006 20:50:46 -0700"Nico Kadel-Garcia" writes:
i spent a couple years with senior publication editor in san jose doing that sort of stuff for technical publications; turns out to be a different mode/style of operation ... some of it was also during the period that the material was being gathered for the phd research ... so some of those issues are also examined in some detail in the thesis.
ref:
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006c.html#37 X.509 and ssh
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006e.html#13 X.509 and ssh
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: About TLB in lower-level caches Newsgroups: comp.arch Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2006 10:06:31 -0700Jan Vorbrüggen <jvorbrueggen-not@mediasec.de> writes:
3090 eventually responded with PR/SM ... PR/SM eventually evolved into the current LPARS (logical partitions; basically subset of virtual machine support built into the fabric of the hardware, isn't V=R, but supports small number of LPAR virtual machines) ... where many mainframes are run with logical partition support as a matter of standard production operation.
this abstract includes mention that z990 requires LPAR mode:
IBM Techdocs Technote: zSeries Performance: Determining the Logical CP
Requirements for a Partition
http://www-03.ibm.com/support/techdocs/atsmastr.nsf/032f6e163324983085256b79007f5aec/7eda0421b6d7af1586256db4001efbeb?OpenDocument
a few other references from around the web found with search engine
IBM: PR/SM for zSeries awarded certificate by German Fed Office for
Tec Security
http://www-03.ibm.com/servers/eserver/zseries/news/pressreleases/2003/z900securityaward_03-14-03.html
IBM Techdocs Flash: LPAR Management Time Performance Update
http://www-03.ibm.com/support/techdocs/atsmastr.nsf/fe582a1e48331b5585256de50062ae1c/bcbaeece31d0d9ff85256d8c000d4e4f?OpenDocument
IBM Redbooks | Modeling Host Environments using SNAP/SHOT
http://www.redbooks.ibm.com/abstracts/SG245314.html?Open
misc. past postings mentioning LPAR and/or PR/SM:
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000.html#8 Computer of the century
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000b.html#51 VM (not VMS or Virtual Machine, the IBM sort)
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000b.html#61 VM (not VMS or Virtual Machine, the IBM sort)
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000c.html#76 Is a VAX a mainframe?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000f.html#78 TSS ancient history, was X86 ultimate CISC? designs)
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000g.html#3 virtualizable 360, was TSS ancient history
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001f.html#17 Accounting systems ... still in use? (Do we still share?)
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001h.html#33 D
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002n.html#6 Tweaking old computers?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002o.html#15 Home mainframes
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002o.html#18 Everything you wanted to know about z900 from IBM
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002p.html#40 Linux paging
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002p.html#44 Linux paging
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002p.html#45 Linux paging
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002p.html#46 Linux paging
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002p.html#48 Linux paging
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003.html#9 Mainframe System Programmer/Administrator market demand?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003.html#56 Wild hardware idea
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003f.html#56 ECPS:VM DISPx instructions
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003k.html#9 What is timesharing, anyway?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003n.html#13 CPUs with microcode ?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003o.html#52 Virtual Machine Concept
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004b.html#58 Oldest running code
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004c.html#4 OS Partitioning and security
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004c.html#5 PSW Sampling
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004e.html#26 The attack of the killer mainframes
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004f.html#47 Infiniband - practicalities for small clusters
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004j.html#45 A quote from Crypto-Gram
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004k.html#37 Wars against bad things
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004m.html#41 EAL5
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004m.html#49 EAL5
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004n.html#10 RISCs too close to hardware?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004o.html#13 Integer types for 128-bit addressing
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004p.html#37 IBM 3614 and 3624 ATM's
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004q.html#18 PR/SM Dynamic Time Slice calculation
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004q.html#76 Athlon cache question
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005.html#6 [Lit.] Buffer overruns
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005b.html#5 Relocating application architecture and compiler support
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005b.html#26 CAS and LL/SC
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005c.html#56 intel's Vanderpool and virtualization in general
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005d.html#59 Misuse of word "microcode"
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005d.html#70 Virtual Machine Hardware
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005d.html#74 [Lit.] Buffer overruns
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005f.html#45 Moving assembler programs above the line
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005h.html#13 Today's mainframe--anything to new?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005h.html#19 Blowing My Own Horn
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005h.html#24 Description of a new old-fashioned programming language
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005k.html#43 Determining processor status without IPIs
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005m.html#16 CPU time and system load
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005p.html#29 Documentation for the New Instructions for the z9 Processor
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005u.html#40 POWER6 on zSeries?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005u.html#48 POWER6 on zSeries?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006b.html#38 blast from the past ... macrocode
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006c.html#9 Mainframe Jobs Going Away
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: X.509 and ssh Newsgroups: comp.security.ssh Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2006 10:20:17 -0700"Nico Kadel-Garcia" writes:
there was no subsequent request for the actual references ... so it appeared like the original question(s) were possible specious and there was no serious interest in investigating why.
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: X.509 and ssh Newsgroups: comp.security.ssh Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2006 10:42:12 -0700Anne & Lynn Wheeler writes:
a couple more recent references to some of the work by the prime
researcher (found with search engine)
http://www.ncrel.literacy.smartlibrary.info/NewInterface/segment.cfm?segment=2369
http://llt.msu.edu/vol4num2/murray/
which includes the following items:
Denise E. Murray is Director of the National Centre for English
Language Teaching and Research, Macquarie University, Sydney,
Australia. She was founding Chair of the Department of Linguistics and
Language Development at San Jose State University. She has been
involved in ESL instruction and teacher education for more than 25
years. Her research interests include crosscultural literacy and the
interaction between language, society and technology. Her publications
include Knowledge machines: Language and information in a
technological society, and Diversity as resource: Redefining cultural
literacy.
Murray, D. E. (1988). The context of oral and written language: A
framework for mode and medium switching. Language in Society, 17,
351-373.
Murray, D. E. (1991). Conversation for action: The computer terminal
as medium of communication. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Murray, D. E. (1995). Knowledge machines: Language and information in
a technological society. London: Longman.
Murray, D. E. (1999). Access to information technology: Considerations
for language educators. Prospect, 14, 4-12.
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: X.509 and ssh Newsgroups: comp.security.ssh Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2006 11:06:13 -0700ref:
.... oh, and i did stumble across an old interim status report on the research project ... partial extract ...
COMPOSITION AS CONVERSATION: The Computer Terminal as Medium of Communication Fifth Research Report April 16th, 1985 Denise E. Murray San Jose CA DATA ANALYSIS In this reporting period, I have concentrated on developing a theoretical framework, driven by the data. This has included: An Operational Definition of 'Conversation'. This is a paper to be presented at the Stanford University School of Education Forum for Research on Language Issues. ..... Defining 'problem-solving' discourse. This genre indicates structures which achieve object transmission, information transmission, direction, description, and information development. ... Channel of communication is not arbitrary; channel may be chosen from available options. This choice is motivated by field, tenor and mode of discourse. Characteristics of discourse depend on choices made along three clines: involvement/detachment planning/spontaneity collaboration/isolation .... I have tallied the amount of computer correspondence and conversation the subject has been engaged in over the past 6 months. I have asked for statistical help. xxxxx has suggested SPSS available on the IBM PC. Presentations I have written the first draft of the paper, COMPUTER CONVERSATION: Adapting the Composing Process to Conversation, to be presented at the International Conference on Computers and the Humanities, Brigham Young University, June 26-28, 1985 I have written the first draft of the paper, When is a Conversation not a Conversation? Operationalizing a Definition of the Object of Discourse Study, to be presented at the Stanford University School of Education Forum for Research on Language Issues, May 11, 1985.... snip ...
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: About TLB in lower-level caches Newsgroups: comp.arch Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2006 15:14:57 -0700"Eric P." writes:
it follows the semantics of TLB but uses real tables for the implementation. in theory, if there is a valid entry in the virtual table (located in the virtual tables in the virtual machine) ... and the corresponding virtual/real page for the virtual machine is in real storage ... then the real/real page number populates the real page table.
the architecture was careful about not specifying how TLBs were implemented ... so that hardware engineers had great deal of latitude in how they could do TLB implementation. As a result, it also provided sufficient latitude to do shadow tables which were a full table set.
the original implementation didn't keep track of how many entries in the shadow table had been made valid ... so that when a purge type operation was required by the architecture of the hardware ... the software implementation just did a complete clear of all possible entries.
previous posts and more detailed references to the implementation:
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006.html#6 UDP and IP Addresses
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006e.html#0 About TLB in lower-level caches
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006e.html#1 About TLB in lower-level caches
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006e.html#5 About TLB in lower-level caches
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006e.html#6 About TLB in lower-level caches
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006e.html#7 About TLB in lower-level caches
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006e.html#12 About TLB in lower-level caches
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006e.html#15 About TLB in lower-level caches
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: About TLB in lower-level caches Newsgroups: comp.arch Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2006 15:40:23 -0700"Eric P." writes:
there was an (internal corporate) activity trace tool called REDCAP that used some virtual machine like technology to capture all I and D (including differentiating loads/stores) and spit out a instruction trace with storage references.
I got to modify that at the science center
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#545tech
in support of an internal tool ... that was eventually released in the mid-70s as a product called vs/repack.
modification was made instead of spitting out an actual instruction trace ... create a reference/use storage array representation for the application ... you could specify 16-byte, 32-byte, 64-byte, etc, increments ... and would spit out the array at specified intervals ... say every 1000 or 5000 or 10000 instructions.
the three arrays were for instruction fetch, data fetch, and data store ... with one bit indicating something had occurred in that storage line sometime during the specified instruction interval.
the application that eventually become vs/repack would take that information ... along with map of the application and attempt to do semi-automated program reorganization for optimal virtual memory operation.
one of the things the science center used this analysis for was the
port of apl\360 from real-storage environment to cms\apl and a virtual
memory operation (including requiring redo of the whole apl storage
management and garbage collection). misc. postings mentioning
apl, cms\apl, etc
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#hone
it was also used by a number of internal product development organizations ... not just for transition from real-storage paradigm to virtual-address-space operation ... but also for generalized execution characteristic operation analysis.
so it turned out that the full instruction emulation was somewhat time-consuming and provided much greater detail than was needed for a lot of application structure re-organization.
so i did a special modification of the kernel virtual address space manager. a victim virtual address space could be selected and specified as being monitored and not to ever have more than N PTEs valid at any moment (akin to your description). Everytime the N+1 PTE fault occurred ... the list of current valid virtual page numbers would be spit out ... and the existing N PTEs had their invalid flag turned on (leaving the real page number in the PTE for translation purposes, but indicating to the hardware that a page fault was to occur for that virtual page). Then the TLB was reset ... and the process would repeat. You sort of got a running indication of virtual pages that were members of active working set for any period. The level of detail was at a much grosser level than full instruction operation provided by REDCAP ... but at much high performance ... and frequently good enuf for the task at hand.
a few years later ... i did a similar kernel hack ... but instead of tracking virtual page use ... tracked all disk file record use. this was used against a number of different production environments as part of designing disk and controller caches ... as well as some filesystem design work. it was one of the first places where we started to see detailed information about bursty use of file collections (i.e. the same collection of files/records used once a day, or week, or month or some other periodic basis).
misc. past posts referencing vs/repack
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/94.html#7 IBM 7090 (360s, 370s, apl, etc)
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#68 The Melissa Virus or War on Microsoft?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000g.html#30 Could CDR-coding be on the way back?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001b.html#83 Z/90, S/390, 370/ESA (slightly off topic)
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001c.html#31 database (or b-tree) page sizes
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001c.html#33 database (or b-tree) page sizes
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001i.html#20 Very CISC Instuctions (Was: why the machine word size ...)
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002c.html#28 OS Workloads : Interactive etc
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002c.html#45 cp/67 addenda (cross-post warning)
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002c.html#46 cp/67 addenda (cross-post warning)
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002c.html#49 Swapper was Re: History of Login Names
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002e.html#50 IBM going after Strobe?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002f.html#50 Blade architectures
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003f.html#15 Alpha performance, why?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003f.html#21 "Super-Cheap" Supercomputing
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003f.html#53 Alpha performance, why?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003g.html#15 Disk capacity and backup solutions
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003h.html#8 IBM says AMD dead in 5yrs ... -- Microsoft Monopoly vs. IBM
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003j.html#32 Language semantics wrt exploits
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004.html#14 Holee shit! 30 years ago!
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004c.html#21 PSW Sampling
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004m.html#22 Lock-free algorithms
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004n.html#55 Integer types for 128-bit addressing
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004o.html#7 Integer types for 128-bit addressing
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004q.html#73 Athlon cache question
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004q.html#76 Athlon cache question
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005.html#4 Athlon cache question
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005d.html#41 Thou shalt have no other gods before the ANSI C standard
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005d.html#48 Secure design
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005h.html#15 Exceptions at basic block boundaries
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005j.html#62 More on garbage collection
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005k.html#17 More on garbage collection
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005m.html#28 IBM's mini computers--lack thereof
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005n.html#18 Code density and performance?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005o.html#5 Code density and performance?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006b.html#15 {SPAM?} Re: Expanded Storage
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006b.html#23 Seeking Info on XDS Sigma 7 APL
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: Debit Cards HACKED now Newsgroups: sci.crypt Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2006 19:34:14 -0700"Ed Weir \(ComCast\)" writes:
• something you have
• something you know
• something you are
... where magstripe cards have been a unique something you have authentication. multi-factor authentication are considered more secure when the different factors are subject to different/unique threats/compromises. one of the ways of viewing pin/passwords something you know (as part of multi-factor authentication ... in conjunction with magstripe cards) are that they are a countermeasure to lost/stolen cards (modulo the people that write their pins on their cards).
however skimming techniques have been around for quite some time, which could record both the magstripe information and entered pins at the same time. as a result, skimming created a common vulnerability to both the magstripe information and the pin information (undermining the benefits of having multi-factor authentication) ... aka the recorded magstripe information could be used to create an acceptable counterfeit card ... which then could be used in conjunction with recorded pins. this can also be viewed as relatively straight-forward analysis from the stand-point of replay attacks.
here is a reference looking into some aspects (modulo skimming technologies)
Signature Debit Fraud Runs 15 Times Higher Than on PIN Debit Fraud
http://www.digitaltransactions.net/newsstory.cfm?newsid=738
from a a thread
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm22.htm#22 FraudWatch - Chip&Pin, a new tenner
discussing various kinds of threats and vulnerabilities to multi-factor authentication.
awareness of various pin-debit skimming technologies are so well-known that you even see them used in some of the weekly (crime-oriented) TV dramas (and in some syndicated daily reruns) ... where they've shown in some detail, skimming implementations.
a few URLs found with simple search engine of atm, overlay, skimming
http://moneycentral.msn.com/content/Banking/P57803.asp
http://www.eubfn.com/arts/982_diebold.htm
http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0721/p15s01-wmcn.html
http://www.atmmarketplace.com/news_story.htm?i=16235
http://www.ou.edu/oupd/idtheft3.htm
http://www.cknow.com/oldnewsletters/2002-01.html#atmskimming
the above search results even turns up some of my postings
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005i.html#1
one of the countermeasures that have been used in conjunction with online credit/debit transactions is to invalidate the account number and issue a new card. this has tended to be more effective with lost/stolen cards ... since the missing card tends to be noticed. skimming (replay) attacks leave the original card in place ... and indications about fraudulent activity comes when somebody checks their statement (or possibly if they get a rejected transaction because all the money is gone).
a little more search engine use ... turns up reference to ABC 20/20
program from 11/8/1998 that looked at atm skimming
http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P1:28890440/MONEY+MACHINE.html
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: Debit Cards HACKED now Newsgroups: sci.crypt Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2006 21:02:35 -0700late breaking news:
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: Debit Cards HACKED now Newsgroups: sci.crypt Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2006 21:09:38 -0700and not quite so up to date
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: Debit Cards HACKED now Newsgroups: sci.crypt Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 08:03:29 -0700Anne & Lynn Wheeler writes:
multi-factor authentication somewhat presumes that different factors are vulnerable to different exploit/threats ... and that PIN has somewhat been considered countermeasure to lost/stolen card (or where the magstripe only has been skimmed).
the new generation of debit cards can be stolen (or counterfeited) ... and used for signature debit fraud w/o the pin (regardless of how the card owner has used the card in the past).
skimming and harvesting
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subintegrity.html#harvest
technologies are capable of acquiring both the magstripe and PIN in common operation ... underminning any presumed effectiveness of multi-factor authentication (and presumptions of independent vulnerabilities).
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: About TLB in lower-level caches Newsgroups: comp.arch,alt.folklore.computers Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 10:58:48 -0700Anne & Lynn Wheeler writes:
part of this was that the science center (4th flr, 545 tech
sq)
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#545tech
had done a lot of pioneering work in monitoring, profiling,
benchmarking, modeling, tuning, etc ... some minor drift
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/submain.html#bench
that eventually evolved into such things as capacity planning.
that is besides having done the original virtual machine
implementation ... Melinda's historical paper
https://www.leeandmelindavarian.com/Melinda/25paper.pdf
as well as having done the implementation used for the internal network
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subnetwork.html#internalnet
and, later, also for bitnet/earn
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subnetwork.html#bitnet
and lot of online/interactive stuff ... including invention of gml
(you might think stands for generalized markup language ... but
actually is initials of the inventor's last names) ... which later
morphed into html, xml, etc
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/submain.html#sgml
the compare&swap instruction was also invented at the science center
("CAS" comes from the inventor's initials):
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#smp
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: Debit Cards HACKED now Newsgroups: sci.crypt Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2006 14:08:34 -0700shoppa writes:
regardless of the initial installation of any possible anti-fraud operation ... if there is any vector that can be used by crooks to get what they want ... then it also has to be maintained securely. This is compromise of anti-fraud equipment as precursor to the actual fraud .. common place is compromising the actual machines/infrastructure or substituting with counterfeit machines
old security proportional to risk posting that looks at a slightly
different aspect of the situation. example is when the systemic risk is
possibly $50m or more, $1b? ...
http://www.digitaltransactions.net/newsstory.cfm?newsid=880
(i.e. value to the crooks), then, can a retailer afford the necessary
security? especially if the actual value to the retailer might possibly
be only a couple thousand?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001h.html#61
aside from the above, there is study about card fees already
accounting for over half of convenience store expenses (ahead of
labor) ... last paragraph in last article:
http://www.transactionworld.com/articles/2005/September/fraudUpdate1.asp
note that there are also a number of studies that repeately highlight
that the majority of fraud (even stuff that appears internet related)
involve insiders. old post about survey highlighting insiders
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm18.htm#49 one more time now, Leading Cause of Data Security breaches Are Due to Insiders, Not Outsiders
and, of course, a few comments about such infrastructures then
requiring the whole planet to be buried miles deep in (data hiding)
crypto (but if the hidden/sensitive information may also be required in
numerous different business processes, then it is impossible to avoid
leakage ... especially when insiders might somehow be involved).
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm15.htm#21 Simple SSL/TLS - Some Questions
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm15.htm#27 SSL, client certs, and MITM (was WYTM?)
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm19.htm#45 payment system fraud, etc
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005u.html#3 PGP Lame question
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006d.html#26 Caller ID "spoofing"
a 2002 article
Phony Interac terminals steal PINs, personal info
http://www.thevarsity.ca/media/paper285/news/2002/11/04/News/Debit.Card.Scam.Hits.York-314427.shtml?norewrite&sourcedomain=www.thevarsity.ca
2004 article (talks about skimming issues)
Canada's First Debit Fraud Estimate Pegs Losses at $44m
http://www.digitaltransactions.net/newsstory.cfm?newsid=366
2005 article ... comparing phishing to skimming for obtaining information enabling account fraud
Turning Phishing into Cash: Criminal Convenience at the ATM?
http://www.securitymanagement.com/library/towergroup_phishing1105.pdf
the above article doesn't mention it, but a much more convenient avenue for phishing account fraud possibly is something like online banking ... as opposed to creating counterfeit cards for use at physical machines.
early magstripe counterfeiting involved using an algorithm to generate a valid appearing account number and then recording it on a magstripe. magstripe cvv technology was introduced as countermeasure to counterfeit magstripes generated from account number algorithms. this is also a countermeasure to magstripe counterfeiting using account numbers obtained from phishing. however, cvv technology wasn't a countermeasure to skimming technology that recorded a complete, valid magstripe.
collection of past risk, fraud, exploits, vulnerability postings
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subintegrity.html#fraud
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: X.509 and ssh Newsgroups: comp.security.ssh Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 11:22:10 -0700"Nico Kadel-Garcia" writes:
also from referenced status report mentioned here
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006e.html#18 X.509 and ssh
the data collection effort and analysis was done under an IBM contract managed out of the Los Angeles Scientific Center and resulted in a IBM research report as well as Stanford phd thesis. The dissertation topic was Composition as Conversation: The Computer Terminal as Medium of Communication (aka title of phd thesis). It was joint between language department and computer ai department (I believe terry winograd was thesis adviser on the computer side)
the earlier statements also reference that the collected material and analysis was used for subsequent papers and books.
for some drift, various collected posts about cmc, some mentioning the
dissertation
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subnetwork.html#cmc
the only publication on the subject that i'm aware of from the period (in the early 80s) that actually mentioned my name was a Datamation article that had some references to my getting blamed for a lot of online stuff that happened during the 70s and early 80s.
some of the activity referenced in the Datamation article is also
mentioned in various past postings about the internal network
... which was larger than the arpanet/internet from the beginning
until approximately summer of 1985 ... when the number of nodes in
the internet passed the number of nodes in the internal network.
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subnetwork.html#internalnet
note the internal network size doesn't include the academic bitnet (in
the US) and earn (in europe) which used the same technology as the
internal network (bitnet/earn was also larger than internet
in the early 80s)
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subnetwork.html#bitnet
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: MCTS Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2006 10:51:48 -0700Brian Inglis writes:
I adapted the lincoln labs fortran 2250 library stuff as device driver for cms edit ... for a full screen editor (the univ. had 2250m1 ... i.e. direct channel attach).
boeing hunstville had some sort of big 2250 operation ... they had a two-processor 360/67 smp for driving 2250. they were running it with specially modified os/mvt release 13 ... that didn't do any paging ... but used the 360/67 virtual memory hardware to get around os/mvt storage fragmentation problems with the long running 2250 applications.
cambridge had a 2250m4 .... i.e. a 1130 as a controller/processor in lieu of the 2250m1 channel controller box. somebody had ported spacewars to the machine ... and my kids would play ... the keyboard layout was split in half with keys dedicated for movement, firing, commands, etc ... for two-player operation.
later, some other vendor's display was remarketed as a 3250 (upgrade for 2250).
later replacement for 3250s were 5080s.
less expensive was the 3277ga ... which was tektronics graphics
display hooked into side of 3277. recent reference
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006e.html#9 terminals was: Caller ID "spoofing"
catia (still around) was widely used cad software for 2250.
http://www.3ds.com/index.php
http://www.3ds.com/fr/products-solutions/3d-for-all/virtools-dev-35/
http://www-306.ibm.com/software/applications/plm/catiav5/
somebody's cad "history" (from search engine)
http://joelorr.home.mindspring.com/id55.htm
another cad history (also mentions lincoln labs)
http://www.memagazine.org/backissues/april00/features/push/push.html
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: X.509 and ssh Newsgroups: comp.security.ssh Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2006 13:03:04 -0700Chuck writes:
well then, two search engines URLs
http://www.google.com/search?as_q=&num=100&hl=en&btnG=Google+Search&as_epq=The+computer+terminal+as+medium&as_oq=&as_eq=&lr=lang_en&as_ft=i&as_filetype=&as_qdr=all&as_occt=any&as_dt=i&as_sitesearch=&as_rights=&safe=images
http://search.yahoo.com/search?_adv_prop=web&x=op&ei=UTF-8&fr=FP-pull-web-t&va_vt=any&vp=The+computer+terminal+as+medium&vp_vt=any&vo_vt=any&ve_vt=any&vd=all&vf=all&vm=i&fl=0&n=100
the long responses were also something cited in the detailed analysis (in fact this is relatviely brief compared to the recent discussion in comp.arch on TLBs).
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: Debit Cards HACKED now Newsgroups: sci.crypt Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2006 13:38:04 -0700late breaking?
from above:
(BOSTON, Mass. - March 16, 2006 - IDTheftSecurity.com) Last week
high-tech thieves hacked the computer systems at Citibank and made off
with countless ATM cards PIN numbers, four-digit consumer security
codes previously considered impervious to attacks. According to Robert
Siciliano, president of IDTheftSecurity.com, no system of security is
foolproof.
... snip ...
pin-debit is just two-factor authentication,
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subintegrity.html#3factor
magstripe card as something you have and pin as something you know (i.e. for a long time, pin has somewhat been countermeasure to lost/stolen cards ... modulo the people that write pins on their cards).
however, static data mechanisms (both magstripe and pin information) have been subject to replay attacks ... subject to various kinds of MITM, phishing, evesdropping, skimming, and/or data breach exploits.
magstripe can be evesdropping, skimming, data breach, etc ... with the harvested information being used to produce a counterfeit magstripe (something you have).
pin can be evesdropping, skimming, data breach, etc ... with the harvested information being entered at later time (something you know)
as previously noted, multi-factor authentication has presumed different vulnerabilities and exploits for the different authentication factors. however, various skimming, evesdropping, data breach, etc. exploits have been able to acquire all authentication factors (negating the assumption about independent vulnerabilities).
rest of thread:
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006e.html#21 Debit Cards HACKED now
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006e.html#22 Debit Cards HACKED now
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006e.html#23 Debit Cards HACKED now
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006e.html#24 Debit Cards HACKED now
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006e.html#26 Debit Cards HACKED now
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: MCTS Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2006 10:07:34 -0700sarr@umich.edu (Sarr J. Blumson) writes:
when virtual memory was announced for 370 ... only 24-bit virtual addressing was available ... and there was a port of tss/360 to tss/370 (although w/o any 32-bit virtual addressing support).
when 370-xa support was announced for 3081 in the early 80s, it only had provision for 31-bit virtual addressing ... not the 32-bit virtual addressing that had been available on 360/67.
one of the major users of tss/370 was at&t ... a custom, stripped down version of the tss/370 kernel was done called sss/370 ... which had unix api interface layered on top. I spent some time in the 80s looking at doing a merge of sss/370 underlying kernel with virtual machine support.
someplace I have some old detailed analysis comparing sss/370 stripped down kernel with vm/370 kernel from the era. part of the issue was that since tss/370{360} had been decommuted, it only had a very small group of dedicated professionals supporting the kernel. The issue with vm/370 was that it became more and more popular, there were lots of people with traditional operating system backgrounds assigned to work on it. As a result, the original vm/370 kernel philosiphy was severely compromised with lots of stuff being dropped into the kernel layer that should have been better done in another way (with vm/370 kernel starting to look more like the original bloated tss/360 kernel and sss/360 starting to look more like the original cp/67 kernel).
reference to multics being one-level store ... and large multics
application at gmr ... and listed some of the other systems that had
implemented one-level store (including tss/360)
http://web.mit.edu/afs/athena.mit.edu/user/other/a/Saltzer/www/multics.html
note while the above claimed that the listed systems had picked up
one-level store from multics, tss/360 and multics were going on
concurrently. for lots more history of the period (ctss, tss/360,
project mac, multics, science center, virtual machines, etc) see
melinda's historical paper
https://www.leeandmelindavarian.com/Melinda/25paper.pdf
various other multics references talk about multics and one-level
store being used at gm long after tss/360 was gone ... this references
multics GM (same GM?) shutdown in the fall of 98:
http://ftp.stratus.com/vos/multics/tvv/chrono.html
search engine even coughed up an old posting of mine about GM claiming
enormous productivity increases for their programmers developing 32bit
(one-level store) applications
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004o.html#2 Integer types for 128-bit addressing
this paper mentions that GM had developed the first operating system
in the mid-50s and the idea had caught IBM's attention (which led to
IBM investing in the new concept)
http://www.computinghistorymuseum.org/teaching/papers/research/cetiner.pdf
umich also had written MTS for 360/67 that supported 24-bit virtual
addressing
http://www.umich.edu/~bhl/bhl/exhibits/mtstime/mtstime.htm
http://www.umich.edu/news/index.html?Releases/2004/Sep04/r090704b
http://www.umich.edu/~urecord/9596/Sep25_95/7.htm
the series of MTS historical references that used to be here
... seemed to have gone 404
http://www.itd.umich.edu/~doc/Digest/
minor drift from long ago and far away ... (making references to a
traditional low-level unix kernel was even drastically more simpler
than sss/370).
Date: 84/01/09 16:35:00
To: wheeler
Dear Lynn,
I got the full scoop on the Amdahl UNIX benchmark. I called in a
marker on a UNIX system type at Bell Labs. (I had help him prove that
system crashes were due to a bug in the Amdahl hardware.)
The benchmark was a full system test on the new UTS software. It is
unfortunate that the number 1.8 got out. Bell ran several
benckmarks. The best of them was 1.8. The overall average was around
1.5. This was a comparason of UTS to SSS/370 on the same hardware. I
beleive it was a 3081 running as a uniprocessor. Remember, UTS does
not run MP.
The 5860 uniprocessor runs at about 80% of the combined 3081 multi-
processors. Since his software does not run MP, if you compare his
hardware/software to the IBM hardware/software, the throughput
difference is 1.25 (1.5 times .80).
Bell claims not to know when Amdahl will put MP support in UTS. Bell
says that they have no idea what it will cost (in performance) to
implement MP (semaphores, etc.)
For the current set of UNIX benchmarks (all jobs fit in memory, no
paging, no contention, etc.), it does not do much good to have a
high-powered supervisor. The current SSS/370 systems at Bell do almost
no paging (over 90% of I/O is data access) and almost no scehuling
(all jobs currently active fit in memory). Until the typical UNIX
workload changes, a complicated high-powered supervior has too much
overhead.
... snip ... top of post, old email index
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: transputers again was: The demise of Commodore Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2006 07:45:07 -0700jmfbahciv writes:
some stuff that appeared to be relatively compact branch instruction structures turned into really ugly if/then/else nesting. I eventually got around to limiting nesting to the 10-15 range ... and then forcing GOTOs. this was much more common in highly optimized kernel code (some stuff that followed relatively straight-forward with branch/goto semantics didn't translate well to if/then/else).
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: MCTS Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2006 08:30:44 -0700Anne & Lynn Wheeler writes:
TSS VM/SP modules 109 261 LOC 51k 232kaka LOC ... lines of (assembler) code.
misc. past sss/370 references:
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002m.html#24 Original K & R C Compilers
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004q.html#37 A Glimpse into PC Development Philosophy
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005b.html#13 Relocating application architecture and compiler support
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005c.html#20 [Lit.] Buffer overruns
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005d.html#61 Virtual Machine Hardware
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005s.html#34 Power5 and Cell, new issue of IBM Journal of R&D
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: CJ Date on Missing Information Newsgroups: comp.databases.theory Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2006 13:41:34 -0700"Paul Mansour" writes:
... aka it isn't so much that 3-valued logic is wrong or incorrect ... it might be considered more of a human factors issue where people are much more prone to making mistakes (and therefor getting unexpected or wrong results) in 3-valued logic.
boolean searches of large databases have seen something analogous ... when you might have billions of items and there are 5-8 search terms ... people frequently inverted the meaning of boolean ANDs and ORs (I think that NLM started seeing this by the early 80s, but it became more wide-spread with growth of internet search engines).
a similar but different occurance was some number of the firewall rule specification languages from the mid-90s ... where a frequent and common mistake for people writing firewall rules would be specifications that inverted what they had actually intended (denying things that they wanted to permit and permitting things that they wanted to deny).
it might be considered analogous to road design ... you might have a perfectly good road ... but if people are having a lot of accidents ... they will frequently attempt to change the road (after they give up on trying to change human nature), possibly just attempting to mitigate what ever human factors issues that are actually resulting in the accidents.
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: The Pankian Metaphor Newsgroups: alt.lang.asm,alt.folklore.computers,rec.arts.int-fiction Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2006 14:15:47 -0700stevendaryl3016@yahoo.com (Daryl McCullough) writes:
in some respects ISO OSI networking standard homogeneous operation and
ARPANET homogeneous operation were similar. the big change was the
switch-over to internetworking protocol on 1/1/83 (internets,
gateways, etc). i've frequently contended that the internal
network
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subnetwork.html#internalnet
was larger than the arpanet/internet (from just about the beginning
until sometime mid-85) was because internal network nodes had something
akin to gateway technology from the beginning (making heterogeneous
interoperability a lot easier). at the time of the big switch-over
the arpanet was approx. 250 nodes. By comparison, later that
same year, the internal network celebrated its 1000th node
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/internet.htm#22
various collected networking postings, many referencing how OSI
homogeneous operation and lack of internetworking severely limited ISO
networking standards
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subnetwork.html#xtphsp
the other big change wasn't so much protocol technology (that enabled
gateways and backbone for inter-networking) ... but the actual
deployment of an operational backbone for inter-networking with
nsfnet1. minor comment about not being allowed to bid on nsfnet1
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/internet.htm#0
various other posts mentiong nsfnet backbone:
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/98.html#49 Edsger Dijkstra: the blackest week of his professional life
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/98.html#59 Ok Computer
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#33 why is there an "@" key?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#37a Internet and/or ARPANET?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#40 [netz] History and vision for the future of Internet - Public Question
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#146 Dispute about Internet's origins
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000.html#49 IBM RT PC (was Re: What does AT stand for ?)
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000c.html#78 Free RT monitors/keyboards
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000d.html#56 Is Al Gore The Father of the Internet?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000d.html#58 Is Al Gore The Father of the Internet?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000d.html#63 Is Al Gore The Father of the Internet?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000d.html#77 Is Al Gore The Father of the Internet?^
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000e.html#5 Is Al Gore The Father of the Internet?^
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000e.html#28 Is Al Gore The Father of the Internet?^
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000f.html#44 Al Gore and the Internet (Part 2 of 2)
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000f.html#47 Al Gore and the Internet (Part 2 of 2)
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001.html#4 Sv: First video terminal?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001h.html#44 Wired News :The Grid: The Next-Gen Internet?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002g.html#40 Why did OSI fail compared with TCP-IP?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002g.html#45 Why did OSI fail compared with TCP-IP?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002h.html#5 Coulda, Woulda, Shoudda moments?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002h.html#79 Al Gore and the Internet
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002h.html#80 Al Gore and the Internet
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002h.html#85 Al Gore and the Internet
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002i.html#45 CDC6600 - just how powerful a machine was it?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003c.html#46 difference between itanium and alpha
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003d.html#13 COMTEN- IBM networking boxes
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003j.html#1 FAST - Shame On You Caltech!!!
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003m.html#28 SR 15,15
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004g.html#12 network history
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004l.html#0 Xah Lee's Unixism
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004l.html#1 Xah Lee's Unixism
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004l.html#5 Xah Lee's Unixism
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004l.html#7 Xah Lee's Unixism
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004q.html#57 high speed network, cross-over from sci.crypt
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005d.html#10 Cerf and Kahn receive Turing award
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005d.html#11 Cerf and Kahn receive Turing award
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005d.html#13 Cerf and Kahn receive Turing award
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005j.html#30 IBM Plugs Big Iron to the College Crowd
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005u.html#53 OSI model and an interview
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: The Pankian Metaphor Newsgroups: alt.lang.asm,alt.folklore.computers,rec.arts.int-fiction Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2006 14:30:52 -0700Anne & Lynn Wheeler writes:
in this period i was into high availability, fault
isolation ... in part having helped with the clustering
and availability stuff for hone
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#hone
as well as having rewritten major portions of the kernel for use by
the disk engineering lab for multiple concurrent engineering testcell
testing (previous attempts with MVS had found 15 minute MTBF with a
single testcell).
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#disk
as well as high performance processor operation and high performance
networking. one of the projects was something I named high-speed data
transport (HSDT)
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subnetwork.html#hsdt
and we had a high-speed backbone ... with both terrestrial and sat. links ... slowest speed link was T1 (1.5mbits) full-duplex.
the original internal network technology implementation resided in a
virtual address space and relied on the vm spool-file system for file
store&forward at each node.
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subnetwork.html#internalnet
it simplified the code and facilitated deployment ... but it had a thruput constraint. the spool-file semantics provided serialized, synchronous 4k-byte block local transfer. with limited number of disk arms for spool files, serialized synchronous transfers and other processes contending for the same service ... a network node might have max. sustained thruput of five to ten 4k-byte blocks per second. in the early days with 9600baud half-duplex lines, 20k to 40k byte/sec aggregate thruput probably seemed sufficient. however, a single hsdt, slow-speed full-duplex T1 link needed a little over 300k-byte/sec sustained (each hsdt link could require a minimum of ten times the standard aggregate thruput).
so for the heck of it, i undertook to move the vm spool file system
out of the kernel into a virtual address space, rewrite it from
scratch in vs/pascal (rather than assembler), and optimize it so hsdt
(internal network) node might be able to see several mbytes/sec
sustained thruput. part of the issue of getting high thruput was
supporting multi-block asynchronous transfer semantics (including
read-ahead and write-behind). the other part was taking the kernel
assembler code and cutting the pathlength in the virtual address space
pascal implementation. some of this was the kernel implementation had
some number of linear list searches. this is analogous but different
to recent mention of tcp finwait list implementation
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006d.html#21 IBM 610 workstation computer
for some context of the period, we were contracting for some equipment built to order in the far east. on the friday before leaving for a trip across the pacific, the communication devision announced a new discussion group on the subject of high-speed communication with the following definitions:
low-speed <9.6kbits medium-speed 19.2kbits high-speed 56kbits very high-speed 1.5mbitsMonday morning in a conference room on the other side of the pacific, there were plaques on the wall with the following definitions
low-speed <20mbits medium-speed 100mbits high-speed 200-300mbits very high-speed >600mbitsthis was also in the period when the mainframe tcp/ip product (running in virtual address space and implemented in pascal) got about 44kbytes/sec sustained thruput consuming cpu cycles of approx. full 3090 processor. I added rfc 1044 support to the implementation and in some testing at cray research between a cray and a 4341-clone ... was getting 1mbyte/sec sustained using about 20 percent of the 4341-clone processor. misc. past posts mentioning rfc 1044 implementation:
as an aside ... although we weren't permitted to bid on nsfnet ... we
did go to the director of nsf and got a technical audit of the
backbone we were operating. one of the statements was that what we had
running was at least five years ahead of all nsfnet bid responses (to
build something new). minor reference to the original nsfnet backbone
program announcement and original nsfnet backbone award announcement
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/internet.htm#nsfnet
misc. other internet historical references from my rfc index
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/rfcietff.htm
and click on "misc. historical references" (in the 1st paragraph).
misc. pasts posts mentioning juxtaposition of the communication
divisions high-speed newsgroup
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/94.html#33b High Speed Data Transport (HSDT)
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000b.html#69 oddly portable machines
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000e.html#45 IBM's Workplace OS (Was: .. Pink)
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003m.html#59 SR 15,15
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004g.html#12 network history
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005j.html#58 Q ALLOC PAGE vs. CP Q ALLOC vs ESAMAP
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005j.html#59 Q ALLOC PAGE vs. CP Q ALLOC vs ESAMAP
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005n.html#25 Data communications over telegraph circuits
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005r.html#9 Intel strikes back with a parallel x86 design
misc. past posts mentioning spool file system rewrite in pascal
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000b.html#43 Migrating pages from a paging device (was Re: removal of paging device)
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003b.html#33 dasd full cylinder transfer (long post warning)
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003b.html#44 filesystem structure, was tape format (long post)
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003b.html#46 internal network drift (was filesystem structure)
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003g.html#27 SYSPROF and the 190 disk
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003k.html#26 Microkernels are not "all or nothing". Re: Multics Concepts For
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003k.html#63 SPXTAPE status from REXX
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004m.html#33 Shipwrecks
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005j.html#54 Q ALLOC PAGE vs. CP Q ALLOC vs ESAMAP
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005j.html#58 Q ALLOC PAGE vs. CP Q ALLOC vs ESAMAP
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005n.html#36 Code density and performance?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005s.html#28 MVCIN instruction
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005s.html#46 Various kinds of System reloads
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005s.html#50 Various kinds of System reloads
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: The Pankian Metaphor Newsgroups: alt.lang.asm,alt.folklore.computers,rec.arts.int-fiction Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2006 08:49:52 -0700Morten Reistad writes:
note that during the period, the internal network wasn't exactly public/commercial network ... it was purely the internal corporate network that interconnected internal corporate sites around the world. the number of nodes were purely internal corporate operations.
it was after the nsfnet backbone period and the actual deployment of internetworking interconnections that commercial ISPs were starting to appear.
something else that the internal network had to deal with ... compared to arpanet/internet ... besides having to deal with a lot larger scale-up ... was that all the links that left corporate premises had to be encrypted. at one time, somebody claimed that the internal network had over half of all the link encryptors in the world.
there were these little things like gov. regulations. all sorts of problems with links from one corporate location in one country to a corporate location in another country ... and the link had to be fully encrypted (there were some real pains trying to get encrypted link between, say a lab in germany and a lab in france and trying to get the respective country PTTs to cooperate).
hsdt pushed this even harder because the links were at least T1 (1.5mbit in US and 2mbit in europe, rather than 9.6kbit or possibly 56kbit that were common at the time) ... and there weren't a whole lot of full-speed link encryptors on the market at that time ... as well as I didn't like paying the price of what they were charging for such full-speed link encryptors. as a result, one of the hsdt activities was to design some hardware that could run a heck of a lot faster encryption, have more function and be significantly lower cost (my target was to be able to build the boards for under $100).
the other thing that was going on in the period ... was the bitnet
academic network (and earn in europe)
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subnetwork.html#bitnet
which used the same technology as the internal network .. but was a totally different network.
old email reference from the person being pulled into to start
and run EARN
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001h.html#65
for some drift, the same person earlier had been on assignment to
cambridge (from the grenoble science center) and was responsible for
adding the additional virtualized virtual memory architecture to the
base cp/67 virtual machine support (original shadow table stuff).
recent thread in comp.arch on TLB that drifted into early virtual
machine infrastructure
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006e.html#7 About TLB in lower-level caches
also
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006e.html#0 About TLB in lower-level caches
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006e.html#1 About TLB in lower-level caches
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006e.html#2 About TLB in lower-level caches
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006e.html#5 About TLB in lower-level caches
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006e.html#6 About TLB in lower-level caches
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006e.html#12 About TLB in lower-level caches
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006e.html#15 About TLB in lower-level caches
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006e.html#19 About TLB in lower-level caches
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006e.html#20 About TLB in lower-level caches
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006e.html#25 About TLB in lower-level caches
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: The Pankian Metaphor Newsgroups: alt.lang.asm,alt.folklore.computers,rec.arts.int-fiction Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2006 09:12:42 -0700Morten Reistad writes:
nsfnet-2 backbone called for full-speed T3 links.
the blue team for nsfnet-2 was made up of something like 20 people from 7 labs around the world. I was allowed to be the red-team. At the review, I presented first (with full-speed T3 support). Then somebody from the blue team started presenting. About five minutes into the blue team presentation, the person running the review interrupted and said that he would lay down in front of a garbage truck before he allowed anything but the blue team proposal to go forward (by five minutes into the blue team presentation, there were already mutterings in the audience about how poorly the blue team proposal compared to the red team proposal).
misc. hsdt
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subnetwork.html#hsdt
ref:
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006e.html#35 The Pankian Metaphor
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006e.html#36 The Pankian Metaphor
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006e.html#37 The Pankian Metaphor
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: The Pankian Metaphor Newsgroups: alt.lang.asm,alt.folklore.computers,rec.arts.int-fiction Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2006 09:28:47 -0700Anne & Lynn Wheeler writes:
mentioning RFC 1044 support
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subnetwork.html#1044
had commercial hardware that included ip-router capable of T3.
The specific mention was about doing enhancements for rfc 1044 support for getting 1mbyte/sec (say 8-10mbits/sec) sustained out of a single 4341-clone (and a cray) ... compared to the base support that would burn nearly a full 3090 cpu getting 44kbytes/sec sustained (say 400kbits/sec).
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: transputers again was: The demise of Commodore Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2006 15:31:05 -0700scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) writes:
however, searching linked list of any kind turned out to be a major scale-up problem for cp67 ... partially as other areas of kernel became more optimized ... internal kernel storage management became a major bottleneck as systems grew larger.
finally, in the early 70s, there was finally a change-over to "subpool" storage management mechanism that drastically cut the kernel overhead for maintenance of internal kernel storage.
random past posts mentioning 360/67 SLT instruction (and 1970
switch-over to subpool logic in release 3 of cp67 ... the push/pop
subpools were also trivial to manage in multiprocessor environment
with the compare&swap instruction which had been invented at
the science center ... in addition to having created virtual
machines, cp67 operating system and the subpool work):
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/93.html#26 MTS & LLMPS?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/98.html#19 S/360 operating systems geneaology
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/98.html#20 Reviving the OS/360 thread (Questions about OS/360)
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000d.html#47 Charging for time-share CPU time
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001c.html#15 OS/360 (was LINUS for S/390)
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001d.html#23 why the machine word size is in radix 8??
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001d.html#33 Very CISC Instuctions (Was: why the machine word size ...)
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001h.html#71 IBM 9020 FAA/ATC Systems from 1960's
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001i.html#15 IBM 9020 FAA/ATC Systems from 1960's
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002.html#14 index searching
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002.html#48 Microcode?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002f.html#54 WATFOR's Silver Anniversary
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002h.html#87 Atomic operations redux
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003m.html#35 SR 15,15 was: IEFBR14 Problems
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004l.html#17 IBM 3090 : Was (and fek that) : Re: new computer kits
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004m.html#22 Lock-free algorithms
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004n.html#36 Shipwrecks (dynamic linking)
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005b.html#28 Relocating application architecture and compiler support
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005c.html#35 [Lit.] Buffer overruns
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005k.html#4 IBM/Watson autobiography--thoughts on?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005l.html#9 Jack Kilby dead
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: CJ Date on Missing Information Newsgroups: comp.databases.theory Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2006 07:41:27 -0700Jonathan Leffler writes:
sorry, finger check transcribing
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003g.html#40 How to cope with missing values - NULLS?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003g.html#41 How to cope with missing values - NULLS?
q->g
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: SSL Certificate Signing Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2006 12:48:54 -0700John S. Giltner, Jr. wrote:
digital certificates are a specialized standards format that are digitally signed. any bit change in the body of the digital certificate will result in the verification of the certificate's digital signature to fail (and treating the result as a bad digital certificate).
a similar but different issue that happened with the XML digital signature standard was that the base XML wasn't defining a deterministic encoding standard.
FSTC finally came up with FSML deterministic encoding standard for (digitally signed) financial transactions. Part of the issue was that standard encoding process results in quite a bit of payload bloat for financial transactions. Their solution was to take a financial transaction, encode it for digital signing and then transmit the original unencoded financial transaction (rather than the bloated encoded version) along with appended digital signature. The recipient would then re-encode the transaction and verify the digital signature. Unless all the encoding processes produced exactly the same bits ... the digital signature verification would fail.
misc. past postings about SSL certification and digital certificates
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subpubkey.html#sslcerts
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: transputers again was: The demise of Commodore Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2006 07:36:07 -0700jmfbahciv writes:
one of the observations from a 9-month research study of how i
communicated, was english didn't even appear to be my native language
(this by a professional esl teacher). recent postings about the
research, which also became a stanford phd thesis and the material for
subsequent papers and books.
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006e.html#13 X.509 and ssh
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006e.html#16 X.509 and ssh
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006e.html#17 X.509 and ssh
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006e.html#27 X.509 and ssh
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006e.html#29 X.509 and ssh
general collected postings related to cmc
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subnetwork.html#cmc
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: Does the Data Protection Act of 2005 Make Sense Newsgroups: alt.computer.security Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2006 17:19:36 -0700"aioe.cjb.net" writes:
• identity theft • (individual) denial-of-service (by institutions)
cal. was also in the middle of passing opt-in legislation regarding
sharing of privacy information (i.e. organizations had to have your
permission before they were allowed to share individual personal
information), when it was pre-emted by GLBA with "opt-out"
(institutions had to send individuals descriptions of how they were
sharing personal information and give individuals a mechanism for
opting out ... as opposed to the pending cal. legislation that would
have precluded in any information sharing unless the individual
specifically directed). misc. past mention of electronic signature
stuff
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subpubkey.html#signature
we were co-authors of the x9 financial industry standard for privacy
x9.99 ... and we spent a lot of time looking at HIPAA, GLBA as well as
EU-DPD (even tho x9 is US standards organization, we spent some time
considering international issues anticipating x9.99 might go to
ISO). As part of x9.99 effort, i did take a privacy subset of my
merged security taxonomy and glossary and merged it with stuff from
HIPAA, GLBA, FTC, and EU-DPD
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/index.html#glosnote
one of the considerations was regarding privacy breaches (cal. passed one of the earliest bills requiring notification in cases of privacy breaches).
part of the issue here is a lot of stuff has been lumped into the category of identity theft/fraud ... and there has been some recent effort to break out "account" fraud as a separate category (especially since a lot of the breaches making it into the press have tended to be account fraud oriented).
in the mid-90s, the x9a10 working group was giving the requirement
to preserve the integrity of the financial infrastructure for
ALL retail transactions ... for the work being done on x9.59
retail payment standard
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/x959.html#x959
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subpubkey.html#x959
the issue here was that the majority of payment security work had been around lost/stolen cards. PINs (for debit cards) are part of multi-factor authentication and can be considered a countermeasure for lost/stolen cards (modulo the people that write PINs on the cards or the debit cards that have logos and can be used w/o requiring a PIN). Reporting lost/stolen card would result in account being turned off ... possibly before any fraud could be done (again a countermeasure to lost/stolen card).
a problem (studied by x9a10) was that starting with online, electronic transactions (by at least the early 70s), skimming and harvesting of electronic information became a threat (that could result in counterfeit cards, fraudulent transactions, etc).
partially because of skimming and harvesting threats
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subintegrity.html#harvest
there has been periodic efforts to institute massive secrecy-based countermeasures protecting account numbers (as well as the rest of the magstripe information). this created some diametrically opposing objectives ... since account numbers are required in numerous business processes related to the payment business (and therefor has to be readily available). On the other hand, the heavily secrecy-based security paradigm would require that the account number is never available.
An additional side issue is security proportional to risk thread
... looking at the potentially massive discrepancy in value of the
data breach to the crook ... vis-a-vis the value to the merchant
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001h.html#61
PINs, in theory represent multi-factor authentication when used in
conjunction with a card ... i.e. from 3-factor authentication
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subintegrity.html#3factor
• something you have
• something you know
• something you are
a PIN is something you know and a card is something you have ... with a PIN being considered a countermeasure for lost/stolen card.
however, implicit in multi-factor authentication is that the different factors are vulnerable to different threats. the advent of online, electronic transactions by at least the early 70s ... really opened up the skimming & harvest compromises. An issue in skimming compromises ... is that both the PIN (something you know) and the card magstripe (something you have) could be BOTH skimmed at the same time ... invalidating assumptions about the value of multi-factor authentication and vulnerability to different compromises and threats. The skimmed magstripe information was sufficient for easily producing a counterfeit card.
part of the x9.59 work was to drastically change the heavy secrecy-based security paradigm ... by eliminating divulging account number as fraud threat, as well as changing the card. a chip-card was required as something you have, but it wasn't "skimmable". A PIN could still be used as countermeasure for lost/stolen card. And the card would actually be a countemeasure to "skimming" (the PIN) ... none of the data-breaches, skimming, and/or harvesting vulnerabilities were sufficient for enabling fraudulent transactions.
So the new kind of physical card became a strong countermeasure to the skimming, harvesting, and data breach vulnerabilities that had been around since at least the advent of online, electronic transactions in the early 70s (meeting assumptions about multi-factor authentication being vulnerable to different threats and exploits).
Part of this is my observation that even burying the planet under miles of (information hiding) cryptography is not sufficient to prevent leakage of account numbers ... in part because there are so many business processes that the account numbers are required for (current situation creates diametrically opposing objectives of total secrecy about the account number and at the same time requiring the account number to be widely available).
Now, reporting lost/stolen card and turning off the account number is still a countermeasure. One of the issues with reporting and account number deactivation with skimming, harvesting and data breach vulnerabilities ... is that typically a lost/stolen card is noticed and reporting may deactivate the account even before any fraud has occurred. The first notice of skimming, harvesting and data breach exploits is likely to be after some fraud has actually occurred (noticing them on a monthly statement or when all the money is gone).
The heavy, secrecy-based security paradigm was further at risk because for ages, it has been well known that the majority of fraud and things like data breach compromises involve insiders (not only does the heavily-secrecy based security paradigm account numbers have to be available ... they have to be available to the group of individuals that are responsible for the majority of the compromises). So a major x9.59 standards objective was to eliminate divulging account numbers as a security and fraud threat (enormous secrecy-based security was no longer required for preventing account fraud).
some postings in threads related to recent account fraud and data
breaches
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm22.htm#20 FraudWatch - Chip&Pin
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm22.htm#21 FraudWatch - Chip&Pin
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm22.htm#22 FraudWatch - Chip&Pin
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm22.htm#23 FraudWatch - Chip&Pin
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm22.htm#25 FraudWatch - Chip&Pin
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm22.htm#26 FraudWatch - Chip&Pin
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006e.html#21 Debit Cards HACKED now
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006e.html#22 Debit Cards HACKED now
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006e.html#23 Debit Cards HACKED now
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006e.html#24 Debit Cards HACKED now
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006e.html#26 Debit Cards HACKED now
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006e.html#30 Debit Cards HACKED now
part of the secrecy vis-a-vis authentication issue was raised
in an old thread. the security PAIN taxonomy
P ... privacy (sometimes CAIN, confidentiality, aka secrecy)
A ... authentication
I ... integrity
N ... non-repudiation
and it was raised that to provide "good" security, both "Privacy" and
"Authentication" was necessary at equivalent strength. The x9.59
counter-argument was that existing payment environment requires
enormous secrecy (privacy) to achieve security (eliminate fraud), in
part because of poor authentication (and therefor it is rather trivial
to skim or harvest information and perform fraudulent transactions).
THe x9.59 scenario is if there is sufficiently strong authentication, then it is no longer necessary to require secrecy as mechanism for preventing fraudulent transactions (and meet the original X9A10 working group requirement to preserve the integrity of the financial infrastructure for ALL retail payments).
Privacy, confidentiality, and secrecy might be required for other reasons ... but the X9.59 financial standard objective no longer required enormous secrecy-based security paradigm in order to eliminate the most common forms of account fraud.
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: using 3390 mod-9s Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main,alt.folklore.computers Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2006 21:17:59 -0700Ron and Jenny Hawkins wrote:
starting with os/360 release 11 ... i began very careful stage2 sysgens to place datasets and order pds members to optimize disk arm motion. i would take the stage1 punched output (stage2) deck. i would reorganize the stage2 cards to result in carefully places system data. for a lot of the university workload, i got nearly three times the system thruput (compared to an out-of-the-box sysgen).
a problem was that thruput would degrade nearly in half over six month period as APARs were applied ... and careful PDS member ordering was disturbed (and i would have to rebuild systems).
i gave a number of presentations at share about the effort applied to both release 11 and 14 sysgens ... pointing out that if i could place the vtoc in the middle of the volume ... then i could order high activity system data on both sides of the vtoc (which was one of the highest activity system areas on disk). the next release was combined "15/16" and contained support for specifying vtoc cylinder location (able to place vtoc in the middle of the volume and then carefully order all the rest of the system data).
during that period i also rewrote much of the cp67 paging system, dynamic page allocation and disk i/o (including implementing ordered seek queuing).
following is post of part of presentation i gave at fall '68 share
meeting in boston on both some of the os mft/14 work and cp67 work.
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/94.html#18 CP/67 & OS MFT14
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/94.html#20 CP/67 & OS MFT14
much, much later there was a project that did extensive gathering of
real-live disk data usage ... it was implemented in vm370 kernel ...
but was used to gather data from not only cms interative workloads ...
but also from heavy production mvs systems (running in virtual
machines). the gathered data was heavily analyzed including a detailed
electronic cache model that looked at various infrastructure
trade-offs ... like comparing ddevice, controller, channel, and
system based caching strategies.
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006e.html#20 About TLB in lower-level caches
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006e.html#25 About TLB in lower-level caches
i had also done a report that claimed that disk relative system thruput had declined by a factor of ten over the years (i.e. systems had gotten 50 times faster ... but disk had only gotten 5 times faster). initially the disk division was upset and assigned their modeling/performance group to refute the observation. however, after a couple months they came back with a report that effectively said that i had slightly understated the problem. this was turned around and the disk division used it for presentations at user group meetings about disk considerations for optimal system thruput. recent post mentioning the disk access cache modeling work (along with discussing a bunch of paging modeling work).
one of the strategies was to leverage the drastic increase in the
amount of electronic memories for procedures to compensate for the
trend in decreasing disk relative system performance (analogous to use
of cpu caches to compensate for electronic memory speeds not keeping
up with the increase in cpu speeds). misc. past posts mentioning the
observations about declining disk relative system performance:
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/93.html#31 Big I/O or Kicking the Mainframe out the Door
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/94.html#43 Bloat, elegance, simplicity and other irrelevant concepts
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/94.html#55 How Do the Old Mainframes Compare to Today's Micros?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/95.html#10 Virtual Memory (A return to the past?)
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/98.html#46 The god old days(???)
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#4 IBM S/360
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001d.html#66 Pentium 4 Prefetch engine?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001f.html#62 any 70's era supercomputers that ran as slow as today's supercomputers?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001l.html#40 MVS History (all parts)
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001l.html#61 MVS History (all parts)
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001m.html#23 Smallest Storage Capacity Hard Disk?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002.html#5 index searching
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002b.html#11 Microcode? (& index searching)
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002b.html#20 index searching
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002e.html#8 What are some impressive page rates?
not too long after that, the disk division introduced the 3880-11 and 3880-13 disk caches. these were only 8mbytes ... so didn't make a lot of sense ... it you were running any sort of paging/caching mechanism based on system storage (typical 3081 configuration had 32mbytes ... so system storage tended to be a superset of what was in the controller cache. if it hadn't yet been brought into system memory, then it likely wasn't also in controller cache and would have to be fetched off (real) disk ... at which time it populated both the disk cache and system memory (i've done a number of posts about dynamically switching from "duplicate" and "no duplicate" caching strategies.
the specific thing that showed up in the 3880-13 marketing literature was showing that 3880-13 8mbyte cache obtained a 90precent hit rate in a large system heavy load environment. How, you might ask? The scenario was sequential single record read of a file formated with 10 4k records per 3880 track. The read of the first record on the track would be a miss and automatically transfer the whole track to the 3880-13 (full-track) cache. The next 9 sequential reads would be for records fetched with the record read on the track .. which would be in the cache. one might have been tempted to specify full-track blocking ... in which case the 3880-13 strategy would have gone from 90percent hit rate to zero percent hit rate.
3880-21 and 3880-23 increased the controller cache sizes from 8mbytes to 32mbytes (offering slightly improved chance ... that if you had a system using its own system level caching strategy ... that not every piece of data in the controller cache was simultaneously in main system memory.
by the late 70s, you were starting to see more and more systems heavily leveraging main processor store as caches to compensate for lagging improvements in disk thruput ... for any and all arbitrary system data. one might be tempted to observe that it would be a deficiency in MVS organization that it couldn't use system memory to cache more of its highest referenced disk data areas ... like VTOCs ... and would have to wait until the availability of controller caches to mitigate disk-access related system thruput problems with respect to VTOCs.
another issue is that in the mid-60s there was a trade-off of (disk)
i/o thruput and real storage. real storage was severely limited
... and many file system designs from the era would cache very limited
amounts of heavily used system data. 360s used CKD search strategies
to basically trade-off the relatively abundant/excess i/o capacity
against the extremely limited real storage. However, by the late 70s
the resource characteristics were reversing the trade-off ... however
mvs was still using ckd multi-track searches for vtoc and pds
directories (type of information that by this time, other systems were
regularly caching in real storage). lots of past postings about being
brought into customer shops to look at severe (multi-)system thruput
problems being cause by multi-track searches (primarily with VTOCs and
PDS directories).
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/submain.html#dasd
lots of past posts discussing "dup" and "no-dup" (duplicate and
no-duplicate) cache strategies (where you have multi-level caching
where different levels are similar in aggregate size).
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/93.html#12 managing large amounts of vm
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/93.html#13 managing large amounts of vm
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/94.html#9 talk to your I/O cache
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000d.html#13 4341 was "Is a VAX a mainframe?"
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001i.html#42 Question re: Size of Swap File
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001l.html#55 mainframe question
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001n.html#78 Swap partition no bigger than 128MB?????
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002b.html#10 hollow files in unix filesystems?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002b.html#16 hollow files in unix filesystems?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002b.html#19 hollow files in unix filesystems?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002b.html#20 index searching
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002e.html#11 What are some impressive page rates?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002f.html#20 Blade architectures
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002f.html#26 Blade architectures
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003f.html#5 Alpha performance, why?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003o.html#62 1teraflops cell processor possible?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004g.html#17 Infiniband - practicalities for small clusters
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004g.html#18 Infiniband - practicalities for small clusters
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004g.html#20 Infiniband - practicalities for small clusters
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004h.html#19 fast check for binary zeroes in memory
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004i.html#1 Hard disk architecture: are outer cylinders still faster than inner cylinders?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005c.html#27 [Lit.] Buffer overruns
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005m.html#28 IBM's mini computers--lack thereof
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006c.html#8 IBM 610 workstation computer
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: using 3390 mod-9s Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main,alt.folklore.computers Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2006 08:25:49 -0700Ron and Jenny Hawkins wrote:
there were also the electronic memory "1655" that emulated 2305, several hundred were made available for internal installations.
i was somewhat caught by the explanation for the vendor's 1655s. supposedly the internal memory manufacturing process had been perfected so that there was very high yield (that and/or the internal mental process was that any chips that failed test were automatically scrapped). the vendor doing the 1655 had quite a bit of memory chips that failed test. however, the requirements for electronic disk operation was totally different than the requirements for processor memory operation. glitches that couldn't be tolerated in processor memory could be used in electronic disk application where the embedded device controller could compensate for numerous types of memory chip glitches ... and take advantage of chips that were otherwise heading for scrap.
another thing that happened in the 80s was the market uptake of
relational databases. the original relational/sql was system/r that had
been done in the 70s at sjr. misc. past posts on relational, sql,
system/r, etc
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/submain.html#systemr
during this period there were ongoing arguments between the "60s" database people at Santa Teresa (bldg. 90) and the system/r people at sjr (bldg. 28).
sort of the summary was STL forces claimed that relational substantially increased the disk space requirements (indexes typically doubled the required physical disk space) and significantly increased the i/o (working the way thru indexes to get to a specific record). The relational forces claimed that exposing record pointers as database abstraction significantly increased the people manual effort in dealing with databases. the relational abstraction eliminated people having to deal directly with record pointer constructs ... and significantly reduced people effort for managing and operating a database.
by the early 80s, hardware was becoming significantly less expensive, people were becoming more expensive (and both electronic memory and disk space was becoming significantly more plentiful). Inexpensive, plentiful disk space muted the argument about doubling disk space for the relational indexes (trade-off between hardware cost and people cost). Furthermore, increases in electronic storage allowed significant amount of relational indexes to be cached ... mitigating the I/O performance penalty for using indexes vis-a-vis direct record pointers (this was independent of additional electronic storage for general caching that would improve overall thruput of all kinds of databases).
for some topic drift, reference in previous post about simulation and
modeling of various paging and caching ... discussed in this post
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006e.html#20 About TLB in lower-level caches
vs/repack was used by some number of corporate software products ... not only in helping with program organization in the transition from real memory operation to virtual memory operation .... but also just generalized program optimization. One such operation that made use vs/repack was the IMS organization in STL.
for additional drift ... when my wife did her stint in POK, in charge of
loosely-coupled architecture ... she had come up with peer-coupled
shared data architecture (sort of the foundation for lot of multi-CEC
operation and today's parallel sysplex). However, at the time, there was
a lot of corporate in-fighting. the communication division wanted
SNA-based communication not only for all terminal management but also
for all processor-to-processor operation. One of the few organizations
at the time that picked up on her architecture was the group doing IMS
hot-standby.
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/submain.html#shareddata
misc. past posts mentioning the 1655s that were made available internally
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001c.html#17 database (or b-tree) page sizes
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001l.html#53 mainframe question
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002.html#31 index searching
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002i.html#17 AS/400 and MVS - clarification please
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002l.html#40 Do any architectures use instruction count instead of timer
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003b.html#15 Disk drives as commodities. Was Re: Yamhill
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003b.html#17 Disk drives as commodities. Was Re: Yamhill
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003c.html#55 HASP assembly: What the heck is an MVT ABEND 422?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003m.html#39 S/360 undocumented instructions?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004d.html#73 DASD Architecture of the future
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004e.html#3 Expanded Storage
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005e.html#5 He Who Thought He Knew Something About DASD
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005r.html#51 winscape?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006.html#38 Is VIO mandatory?
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006c.html#1 Multiple address spaces
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: sci.crypt Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2006 08:31:56 -0700greymaus writes:
there was a posting in the newsgroup late last night summarizing it as a denial-of-service attack and some of the countermeasures being taken.
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/