191–200 of 337 posts
People should realize that ancient Chinese were onto something when they told that all phenomena shall evolve only so much before they tip over the peak of maximum development and inevitably rumble downhill into overdevelopment. P.S. Wow, hit a soft spot. Flagging this for what? For being unloyal to the ideology of everlasting growth? Try again as much as you can.
Downvoted for the frothy edit. Chill out there ya toughy. Someone clearly hit a soft spot on you.
Apparently Intel attempted to play down the issue by trying to award the researchers with the 40,000 dollar tier reward and a separate 80,000 dollar reward as a "gift" (which the researchers kindly denied) instead of the maximum 100,000 reward for finding a critical vulnerability. Intel was also planning to wait for at least another 6 months before bringing this to light if it wasn't for the researchers threatening t…
In this case the practice of responsible disclosure has been turned on its head. There should no longer be any responsible disclosure with Intel as long as they do not commit to changing their behavior.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's not exactly true. Broadly speaking, there have been two very different kinds of speculative execution vulnerabilities with different security implications and workarounds. Spectre and its relatives are an attack on trusted code that process untrusted data using certain code patterns guarded by conditionals that can be speculatively executed; they're inherent to speculative execution past branches, but they req…
Yes, that's true, several of the vulnerabilities involve checks that are performed late (not at time of speculative access, but at some point before instruction commit). Not excusing the design choice at all, but it's conceivable that an engineer could make this choice if (i) side-channel effects of the speculation are not considered at all, and (ii) the postponement of the check allows the load latency to be reduced…
People should realize that ancient Chinese were onto something when they told that all phenomena shall evolve only so much before they tip over the peak of maximum development and inevitably rumble downhill into overdevelopment. P.S. Wow, hit a soft spot. Flagging this for what? For being unloyal to the ideology of everlasting growth? Try again as much as you can.
Downvoted for the frothy edit. Chill out there ya toughy. Someone clearly hit a soft spot on you.
Why doesn't this type of news cause INTC to tank - they're up today. I know the market is up today, but (and it's probably my innate overreaction) I would think this sort of news would cause its stock to suffer.
Looks like AMD Cpus are safe again.
Note that Spectre definitely affected AMD chips and in general these sorts of side channel attacks based on speculative execution are extremely likely to be effective against any chip (including AMD manufactured ones) that employ speculative execution though the precise implementation might have to be jiggered a bit.
Sorry for being naive. Are these kind of CPU Securities vulnerabilities new? Why it is in the past 20 years we have had close to zero in the news ( At least I wasn't aware of any ) and ever since Spectre and Meltdown we have something new like every few months. And as far as I am aware they are mostly Intel CPU only. Why? And Why not AMD? Something in the Intel design process went wrong? And yet all the Cloud Vendor…
This is a common pattern for new bug classes. Nobody thought to look at this, and when they did, the rabbit hole went deep. We likely haven’t seen the bottom. AMD are not better. They’re probably worse. They’ll be looked at when the Intel tree stops bearing fruit. But finding an Intel bug is higher impact, so that’s what researchers want to look at.