Viewing profile — sirdarckcat

It's just written by the CPU during a ucode update

> This probably depends on a lot of non-public info: how does the PSP validate CPU state? https://github.com/amd/AMD-ASPFW/blob/3ca6650dd35d878b3fcbe5...

> But raw write access to the flash depends on you being in SMM Look at tests/stop.sh and check the different segments (ls:, ms:, etc you can also address them like 0:[..], 1, 2, 3…

You can make a new instruction (or repurpose an existing one) that accesses physical memory bypassing the page walk, which would be faster. You can also make instructions that bypa…

We were not able to demonstrate that Zen5 is affected. If we end up doing so, we may release a new advisory or something.

151515 is such an elitist number.. 3 * 13 * 37 * 3 * 5 * 7

[citation needed] * ChromeOS, COS and Android are opensource, and they are all up to date. Mind elaborating?

> Sometimes I wish there was a Linux kernel security advisory process, but this would need funding or a dedicated volunteer. This is already happening https://osv.dev/list?q=Kernel…

for what is worth, the link gregkh pointed you to explains the answer for your first 2 points. Your last point is wrong. Simple example, which of the following thousand bugs are ex…

about duplicates - google has this thing called grants https://bughunters.google.com/about/rules/5479188746993664 that pay people for doing security research, even if they don't fi…

It can be tiring at times.

Insecurity is invisible. Users have no way to know the weaknesses in the software they use until it's too late. Disclosure is meant to make it possible for users to see what weakne…

Vulnerability deadlines are disclosure deadlines, not remediation deadlines. There's plenty of vulnerabilities that can't be fixed in that time, and I think it's fair for the publi…

Might be worth noting, 90 days are how long Google thinks it is reasonable to keep vulnerabilities secret without a fix. The longer it is kept secret, the benefits of the public kn…

Are you suggesting Google to make all unfixed vulnerabilities public after 90 days? Would that be even if the finder does not want them to become public? Or just as an opt-out type…

http://g.co/appsecurity has more details but TL;DR is that Google is supportive of people disclosing unfixed bugs after 90 days, which is what happened here.

We added this section for the write-ups. We want to be able to republish write-ups and their code if we want.