<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Hypervisor on Experiment, Fail, Learn, Repeat</title>
    <link>https://www.hairizuan.com/tags/hypervisor/</link>
    <description>Recent content in Hypervisor on Experiment, Fail, Learn, Repeat</description>
    <generator>Hugo -- gohugo.io</generator>
    <language>en</language>
    <copyright>Copyright © 2026 Hairizuan Noorazman</copyright>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 11 Sep 2026 19:33:30 +0800</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://www.hairizuan.com/tags/hypervisor/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    
    <item>
      <title>How Hypervisors Isolate Virtual Machine Memory</title>
      <link>https://www.hairizuan.com/how-hypervisors-isolate-virtual-machine-memory/</link>
      <pubDate>Mon, 07 Sep 2026 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      
      <guid>https://www.hairizuan.com/how-hypervisors-isolate-virtual-machine-memory/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;While investigating the &lt;a href=&#34;https://www.hairizuan.com/the-isolation-boundary-of-multikernel-linux-containers/&#34; &gt;isolation boundary of Multikernel Linux containers&lt;/a&gt;, I kept returning to one comparison: why can a compromised virtual-machine guest kernel not simply map the host&amp;rsquo;s memory, while a compromised Multikernel child kernel can attempt to map memory outside its allocation?&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      
    </item>
    
  </channel>
</rss>
