I think it's a bit ironic that the text, in a sense, blames Google for these problems by calling them the "Google Project Zero Exploits" as if Google was some sort of cyber crime syndicate using their evil powers to exploit intel.
Intel Security Issue Update: Addressing Reboot Issues
101–110 of 129 posts
Re: Intel Security Issue Update: Addressing Reboot Issues
#102To be fair, it can well be that some sloppy OEM drivers take too many assumptions on reserved bits in registers (which the new microcode may be legitimately changing) or on undocumented timing side-effects related to some instructions (which the new microcode may affect, being that the root problem in the first place!). These symptoms are also the classic ones you get when you install an OS on a new-generation, well-…
Don't speculate, it adds nothing but confusion.
Re: Intel Security Issue Update: Addressing Reboot Issues
#103Earlier quoted context omitted.
Customers actually could turn to AMD... their offerings are very competitive right now.
As an avid fan of AMD going back to the late 80s they have always been a cheaper and better alternative. I am still bitter about rdram in regards to Intel
They really haven't. AMD was so far behind Intel they were in danger of going extinct in data centers. Only very recently have they caught up again to be a credible competitor.
This bug and Intel's response is very good timing for AMD though.
Re: Intel Security Issue Update: Addressing Reboot Issues
#104This is -- to say the least -- frustrating. First, the busted microcode is still available on the Intel Download Center[1], without any warning that they recommend that you not, in fact, install it. Second, the press release is still being evasive: they have not merely "received reports"; they in fact know that it's causing issues, and the press release is avoiding the much stronger language that Intel is giving priv…
I've only owned Intel processors my entire life but this crosses a line. I plan to buy my first AMD motherboard/cpu and not look back. I really hope that one day Intel realizes that it's not enough to distract us with new shiny toys. Nearly all of us want solid trustworthy hardware first and foremost.
Re: Intel Security Issue Update: Addressing Reboot Issues
#105Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Between Intel's numerous CPU bugs that they refused to refund customers for How do you propose this could work? Are side channel vulnerabilities in CPUs really bugs?
They promise modern process isolation and fail to deliver it. Their fixes reduce performance significantly. IANAL, but that sounds like a defective product.
> They promise modern process isolation and fail to deliver it.
Before one makes such a statement, one has to define "modern process isolation" in a very formal way, so that not anybody (neither Intel nor the customer) can redefine the meaning as they desire. I am not aware that Intel gave such a formal definition that they claim to obey to (but perhaps fail). So any operating system can only rely on very weak guarantees for the processor to provide "isolation" (using quotes since I have not defined the term "isolation" formally). Thus the OS has to implement stronger isolation primitives that it desires by itself (by using the weak primitives that the processor provides).
Re: Intel Security Issue Update: Addressing Reboot Issues
#106I think all the more jarring is the smiling face of the spokesperson next to this announcement. Atleast can't the announcement be not with a photo or have a serious looking photo of the spokesperson.
The photo seems to remind me of someone saying, "that's all you get suckers" coupled with an evil grin.
Re: Intel Security Issue Update: Addressing Reboot Issues
#107My broadwell (i5-2500k) windows desktop has started blue screening like crazy if I do large continous network transfers (i.e. saturating gigabit ethernet). I didn't have this problem before I rebooted for my most recent update. I thought it might be memory, but an 8+ hour memory scan (windows internal one, not the normal linux one) didn't tickle any bad bits and its not erorring in any unique component, each time, it…
> My broadwell (i5-2500k) That's Sandy Bridge, 3 generations older than Broadwell.
you are correct, I actually looked it up, and meant sandy bridge (hence why I wrote "limited to those arches, or others"), but brain farted while writing.
Re: Intel Security Issue Update: Addressing Reboot Issues
#108I heard from my colleague that he had boot issues with a server (new Centos7 kernel) and a RAID he set up today.
Re: Intel Security Issue Update: Addressing Reboot Issues
#109Re: Intel Security Issue Update: Addressing Reboot Issues
#110Earlier quoted context omitted.
As an avid fan of AMD going back to the late 80s they have always been a cheaper and better alternative. I am still bitter about rdram in regards to Intel
They really haven't. AMD was so far behind Intel they were in danger of going extinct in data centers. Only very recently have they caught up again to be a credible competitor. This bug and Intel's response is very good timing for AMD though.
They have been in a similar position before. It took Intel a while to respond to x64/Opteron. AMD was soaring for while back then.