← Back to context

Comment by eddythompson80

20 hours ago

How is this different from Xen? It's the same approach as Xen or Hyper-V where the hypervisor is its own component, then you boot into a virtualized Dom0 or Root Partition (in Xen and Hyper-V terminology respectively) that can manage the hypervisor underneath it.

This is different from KVM where your hypervisor runs in your Dom0/Root Partition.

13 comments

eddythompson80

Reply
markasoftware  19 hours ago

Xen had a generic guest to host vulnerability disclosed in the last few days: https://codeant.ai/security-research/xenbleed-a-grant-copy-c...

  • eddythompson80  19 hours ago

    Yeah, all security design guarantees are as good as the implementation at the end of the day. All the fancy hashing and encryption math in the world isn't gonna save you from an erroneous `"" == ""` check or an invalid reference check.

    I was replying to OP saying it's the same "approach" as Xen, if your preference is "approach" based. It's fair though to point to Nova's smaller code base. It's becoming an important metric for me in general (how big is the code base). It's not a bullet proof thing, but having a smaller code base is a positive sign in 2026 for me.

  • zobzu  10 hours ago

    having worked with AWS, xen had a lot of very bad vulns over its lifetime as well.

    there's no magic.

  • ThePowerOfFuet  18 hours ago

    Now compare to Linux, which is the point raised. Nobody said alternatives like Xen are perfect... but my oh my, some are much better in this regard.

lrvick  20 hours ago

This is a much lighter weight (~100k) alternative to Xen focused on baremetal TPM anchored remote attestation, formal verification, and trusted computing applications.

Anyone considering Xen should probably also consider Nova depending on requirements.