• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

Intel bug incoming? Meltdown and Spectre exploits

Cromulent said:
Just patched Windows 10 with the latest patch and ran the Heaven 4 benchmark and my results at 1080p were almost exactly the same as my results prior to installing the patch.

I did upgrade my Samsung 840 Pro SSD to the latest firmware in between though but I doubt that made much of a difference.
Click to expand...
Which firmware do you have installed now? I've had DXM06B0Q installed for several years now.
 
I wonder if Krzanich will weather this storm, Intel's quarterly reports are really good, but then again they keep taking PR hits, 14/10nm difficulties, vulnerabilities keep piling up, plus these accusations of insider trading (which seem unfounded but who knows at this point...).
 
Silent_Scone said:
https://newsroom.intel.com/news/intel-responds-to-security-research-findings/
Click to expand...

That was from yesterday and was already scoffed at by pretty much every tech site, not to mention AMD released their own statement... Intel are basically trying to take everyone else down with them...

Notice they omit the "Read" fuction from their statement when talking about what the exploit can do? its laughable at best, some of the biggest PR tripe ive ever read.

It must be full panic station mode at Intel right now.
 
Rroff said:
Intel are going to have to up their game - this isn't the only serious and long standing hardware vulnerability that has come to light lately with their hardware - there have been at least 2 AMT disclosures in the last 6 months - and people seem to have quickly forgotten about stuff like https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/05/01/intel_amt_me_vulnerability/

Not a fan of AMD's position though - they seem to just deny any problem before there has even been any testing and/or make a big deal about "close to zero" when it isn't zero and seems based on only preliminary testing - I'm not sure I trust them any more than Intel when it comes to security and they have less resources to get on top of patching issues like this if they do arise.
Click to expand...


Why are you saying based on no or preliminary testing? Near zero means, we've tested exhaustively but we can't be 100% sure so if we say zero and someone finds one vector for attack 10 years from now we can get sued, so we say near zero, nothing more or less. AMD have known about this issue at least as long as since Google brought it up a year ago to these companies... you think they've done zero testing between now and then? Also google themselves who found the exploit said that they couldn't only make Zen vulnerable to a non malicious attack they wrote, the three malicious attacks were only vulnerable on older AMD architectures (in a non default state) and everything Intel.

Implying they haven't tested is crazy.

Also the linux patch is hilarious. The check in english basically says, if it's an AMD processor, assume it's secure, otherwise enable the patch.
 
drunkenmaster said:
Implying they haven't tested is crazy.
Click to expand...

I was talking about testing in a contextual fashion not saying there hasn't been any testing at all. Some of the things where they are saying close to or near zero are binary situations where either they should be fully proof against the known vectors in the situation talked about or vulnerable - near zero is the same as vulnerable just not as easily exploited within those specific parameters.
 
Rroff said:
I was talking about testing in a contextual fashion not saying there hasn't been any testing at all. Some of the things where they are saying close to or near zero are binary situations where either they should be fully proof against the known vectors in the situation talked about or vulnerable - near zero is the same as vulnerable just not as easily exploited within those specific parameters.
Click to expand...

Sorry but that is bull. Near zero doesn't mean they are vulnerable but it's not easily exploited. Everyone has tested Zen and no one has been able to expose it, but that doesn't mean 2 or 10 years from now someone won't find some insane method to do it and if AMD said zero risk they can be sued.

When your words can have consequences, like billion dollar lawsuits you tend to say near zero to cover your backside, not because you are vulnerable and it's just not easy to do. If AMD know they can be exploited and are saying this for just an exploit that is hard to attack they would also get sued for that. Near zero means at this time no one has found any way in which AMD is vulnerable to this variant of exploit, but legally saying zero risk is a landmine waiting to kill us in the future, nothing more or less.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom