-
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.
Don
Another vulnerability - this time in 10th/11th/12th gen Intel chips
aepicleak.com
www.securityweek.com
As with all of these vulnerabilities though - they are relatively overstated, and certainly on a home user level are of little concern.
ÆPIC Leak
ÆPIC Leak: Architectural Bug in Intel CPUs Exposes Protected Data
Researchers disclose the details of ÆPIC Leak, an architectural bug in Intel CPUs that exposes data protected by SGX.
As with all of these vulnerabilities though - they are relatively overstated, and certainly on a home user level are of little concern.
Caporegime
If all these vulnerability were not present and no patches wonder how much performance wouldn't be lost.
You need Root or Admin access for that one anyway.
it's a non story
Most of them are over hyped nonsense like the latest claims.
if you had root or admin anyway then why would you bother to do this so called "exploit"
It's like me claiming theres an exploit where I can rob your house, all it takes is for you to let me in, massive glaring exploit that effects all of your houses
I think it's interesting to consider what's preferable for a manufacturer, releasing a high performance CPU that gets you a lot of sales initially and then having to deal with the fallout from a vulnerability getting exposed somewhere down the line, or addressing it prior to release and having a less competitive product. Take Alder Lake for example, Intel got a lot of kudos for it's performance relative to prior generations and indeed AMD. Imagine they had some vulnerability that needed a 10% performance hit to mitigate. Does intel want that addressed pre launch or would they rather ship the product, grab market share and then worry about the vulnerability later?
Woah, I thought I was cynical
The lack of benchmarks and awareness of how the mitigations impact performance would definitely suggest the former is preferable. Day one reviews seem to set the tone forever, which I guess is part of why reviewers are always so keen to have them up, to capture that initial interest.
Well, Intel's server products are way behind and wasn't the recent earnings call thing hinting at them having found extra vulnerabilities in Sapphire Rapids (which is roughly the server of Alder Lake)?
So it might be exactly Intel's strategy: release and Alder Lake to consumers without extensive security testing, but fix any security issues for the server release.
The interesting thing would be to know whether Intel suspected any security vulnerabilities before they released to consumers.
So it might be exactly Intel's strategy: release and Alder Lake to consumers without extensive security testing, but fix any security issues for the server release.
The interesting thing would be to know whether Intel suspected any security vulnerabilities before they released to consumers.
wasnt that yet again another rumour from who knows where? also AMD
https://www.tomshardware.com/news/new-vulnerability-affects-all-amd-zen-cpus sounds like the same exploit
