XCP-ng
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Groups
    • Register
    • Login

    XCP-ng 8.2 updates announcements and testing

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved News
    703 Posts 67 Posters 1.1m Views 86 Watching
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • gskgerG Offline
      gskger Top contributor @stormi
      last edited by

      @stormi Update worked fine and no problems so far. Did the usual tests to create, move, snapshot, backup and restored some Linux and Windows VMs.

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
      • A Offline
        Andrew Top contributor @stormi
        last edited by

        @stormi I've had it running for 24 hours on several active machines doing the usual jobs. Seems good.

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
        • olivierlambertO Offline
          olivierlambert Vates 🪐 Co-Founder CEO
          last edited by

          Same here 🙂

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
          • stormiS Offline
            stormi Vates 🪐 XCP-ng Team
            last edited by

            Update released (xen + uefistored). Thanks for your tests!

            Blog: https://xcp-ng.org/blog/2022/06/13/june-security-update-1/

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
            • stormiS Offline
              stormi Vates 🪐 XCP-ng Team
              last edited by stormi

              New security update (xen, Intel CPUs)

              Xen is being updated to mitigate hardware vulnerabilities in Intel CPUs.

              • Upstream (Xen project) advisory: XSA-404
              • Citrix Hypervisor Security Bulletin (which also covers vulnerabilities that we already fixed in the previous update): https://support.citrix.com/article/CTX460064/citrix-hypervisor-security-update

              Impact of the vulnerabilities - I'll quote Citrix' security team here: "may allow code inside a guest VM to access very small sections of memory data that are actively being used elsewhere on the system"

              Test on XCP-ng 8.2

              From an up to date host:

              yum clean metadata --enablerepo=xcp-ng-testing
              yum update xen-dom0-libs xen-dom0-tools xen-hypervisor xen-libs xen-tools --enablerepo=xcp-ng-testing
              reboot
              

              Versions:

              • xen-*: 4.13.4-9.23.1.xcpng8.2

              What to test

              Normal use and anything else you want to test. The closer to your actual use of XCP-ng, the better.

              Test window before official release of the updates

              ~2 days.

              J gskgerG A 3 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • J Offline
                JeffBerntsen Top contributor @stormi
                last edited by

                @stormi
                This seems to be working well on my test pool.

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                • olivierlambertO Offline
                  olivierlambert Vates 🪐 Co-Founder CEO
                  last edited by

                  Same here 🙂

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                  • gskgerG Offline
                    gskger Top contributor @stormi
                    last edited by gskger

                    @stormi The initial update worked fine on my playlab (two Dell Optiplex 9010, Intel i5-3550 CPU, Synology shared NFS storage), but I can not migrate VMs between hosts anymore. Neither XO from third party script (commit 395d8, xo-server 5.96.0, xo-web 5.97.2) nor XCP-ng Center 20.04.01 work.

                    Edit: After a complete (bare metal) restart of hosts and storage systems, everything works as expected (create, migrate, start/stop, snapshot of VMs), so I can only blame myself

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                    • A Offline
                      Andrew Top contributor @stormi
                      last edited by

                      @stormi The update has been OK for me on a bunch of standard machines (older Intel/AMD) over the last day. Normal VM operation, migration, backups, reboots, etc.

                      I'm having problems with cross host VxLANs, but I can't blame the update for that. I reinitialized the XO SDN plugin and it's working again. It may have something to do with changing pool masters and rebooting the hub server.

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                      • stormiS Offline
                        stormi Vates 🪐 XCP-ng Team
                        last edited by stormi

                        The update is published. Thanks for your tests!

                        Blog post: https://xcp-ng.org/blog/2022/06/27/june-2022-security-update-2/

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • N Offline
                          NielsH
                          last edited by

                          Thanks for the new update!

                          We're trying to determine if we are vulnerable to this. In https://xenbits.xen.org/xsa/advisory-404.html I see:

                          Per Xen's support statement, PCI passthrough should be to trusted

                          domains because the overall system security depends on factors outside

                          of Xen's control.

                          As such, Xen, in a supported configuration, is not vulnerable to

                          DRPW/SBDR.

                          Does this mean we are not vulnerable to XSA-404 if we do not use PCI Passthrough?

                          Cheers,
                          Niels

                          stormiS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • stormiS Offline
                            stormi Vates 🪐 XCP-ng Team @NielsH
                            last edited by

                            @NielsH DRPW and SBDR are related to MMIO (and thus PCI Passthrough), but there are other vulnerabilities that are not related to it.

                            N 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • N Offline
                              NielsH @stormi
                              last edited by

                              @stormi said in Updates announcements and testing:

                              @NielsH DRPW and SBDR are related to MMIO (and thus PCI Passthrough), but there are other vulnerabilities that are not related to it.

                              Okay, thanks. We have to update it than sadly, heh.
                              Cheers!

                              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • N Offline
                                normanghenderson
                                last edited by

                                Hi, I've just applied the May and two June security updates (total of 8 patches) to a test box, no problems. But before I try these on the live pool: can anyone tell me if a reboot is required? The blog posts referenced do not mention this.

                                stormiS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • stormiS Offline
                                  stormi Vates 🪐 XCP-ng Team @normanghenderson
                                  last edited by

                                  @normanghenderson They do 🙂

                                  c6ac1e0f-aaef-426c-b1d0-7702183e6cf9-image.png

                                  N 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • N Offline
                                    normanghenderson @stormi
                                    last edited by

                                    @stormi Doh. How did I miss that? 😮

                                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                    • stormiS Offline
                                      stormi Vates 🪐 XCP-ng Team
                                      last edited by stormi

                                      New maintenance update candidate (xs-openssl, xcp-ng-xapi-plugins, blktap, sm)

                                      Several package updates that we had queued for a future update are ready for you to test them.

                                      • xs-openssl:
                                        • was rebuilt without compression support. Although compression was not offered by default and the clients that connect to port 443 of XCP-ng hosts don't enable compression by default, it's better security-wise not to support it at all (due to CRIME), and this will make security scanners happier.
                                        • received a patch from RHEL 8's openssl which fixes a potential denial of service: "CVE-2022-0778 openssl: Infinite loop in BN_mod_sqrt() reachable when parsing certificates"
                                      • xcp-ng-xapi-plugins received a few fixes:
                                        • Avoid accidentally installing updates from repositories that users may have enabled on XCP-ng (even if they should never do this), when using the updater plugin (Xen Orchestra uses it to install updates).
                                        • In the updater plugin again, error handling was broken: whenever an error would occur (such as a network issue preventing from installing the updates), another error would be raised from the error handler, and thus mask the actual reason for the initial error. That's what happens when you write command with 3 m 😅.
                                      • blktap: received a fix backported from one if Citrix Hypervisor's hotfixes, which addresses a possible segmentation fault if you create a lot of snapshots at the same time.
                                      • sm ("Storage Manager", responsible for the SMAPIv1 storage management layer) received a few fixes:
                                        • We fixed an issue with local ISO SRs and mountpoints: creating a local ISO SR on a directory that is a mountpoint for another filesystem would unmount it. The patch was not accepted upstream because it touches legacy code that Citrix won't support, according to the developer who answered, but we considered it safe and useful enough to apply it to XCP-ng anyway.
                                        • The (experimental) MooseFS driver will now default to creating a subdirectory in the mounted directory, to avoid collision between several SRs using the same share.
                                        • The update also includes the followings fix from one of Citrix Hypervisor's hotfixes: CA-352880: when deleting an HBA SR remove the kernel devices
                                        • Two other fixes which are hard to explain in user terms but typically don't affect the majority of users.

                                      Test on XCP-ng 8.2

                                      From an up to date host:

                                      yum clean metadata --enablerepo=xcp-ng-testing
                                      yum update blktap sm sm-rawhba xcp-ng-xapi-plugins xs-openssl-libs --enablerepo=xcp-ng-testing
                                      xe-toolstack-restart
                                      

                                      Toolstack restart should be enough but I haven't checked yet that it does restart the TLS tunnel, so a reboot may be safer to ensure you actually test the updated packages.

                                      Versions:

                                      • xs-openssl-libs: 1.1.1k-6.1.xcpng8.2
                                      • xcp-ng-xapi-plugins: 1.7.2-1.xcpng8.2
                                      • blktap: 3.37.4-1.0.1.xcpng8.2
                                      • sm, sm-rawhba: 2.30.7-1.2.xcpng8.2 updated 2022-07-08 to fix a regression: 2.30.7-1.3.xcpng8.2

                                      What to test

                                      Normal use and anything else you want to test. The closer to your actual use of XCP-ng, the better.

                                      Test window before official release of the updates

                                      No precise ETA, but the sooner the feedback the better.

                                      gskgerG J 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                      • olivierlambertO Offline
                                        olivierlambert Vates 🪐 Co-Founder CEO
                                        last edited by

                                        Tested with success here 🙂

                                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                                        • gskgerG Offline
                                          gskger Top contributor @stormi
                                          last edited by

                                          @stormi All good with updating my playlab.

                                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 2
                                          • J Offline
                                            JeffBerntsen Top contributor @stormi
                                            last edited by

                                            Seems to be working fine for me as well.

                                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 2
                                            • First post
                                              Last post