Some serious security bug in INTEL CPUs?? Since Westmere possibly

[mockingbird]

Re: Some serious security bug in INTEL CPUs?? Since Westmere possibly

I wonder what the real-world risc is with XP or Vista? Both are unsupported now and won't be getting any update.

XP is still supported via PSOReady 2009 updates until April 2019.

Also:

1) You can still run pretty much run any new Intel CPU on XP. AHCI drivers are available even up to the latest generation (Don't quote me on that). So if you have a BIOS with the updated microcode, the risk is zero.
2) I'm pretty certain MS has already released the OS-level microcode update for XP.

I'm on XP64 though (not supported) with an undervolted, underclocked Wolfdale-DP, so I am wide open.

[Behemot]

Re: Some serious security bug in INTEL CPUs?? Since Westmere possibly

I wonder what the real-world risc is with XP or Vista? Both are unsupported now and won't be getting any update. They should run much faster than 7 with SW patches though. I've just recently run tests on a rig donated to ball tombola (to show how capable of such system still is) and the Q8400 had no troubles playing 4k teaser on a display with presentation on a projector. The whole thing (without the projector though) drew up to 150 W while doing that.

BTW - the screwed-up windblows update for Vista is something, I'll tell ya. Close to 3 days was still not enough for the thing to find updates. Think a customised image with at least 100 of the updates already in it will be necessary for further installations, that should take the time down to about 1-2 days.

[mockingbird]

Re: Some serious security bug in INTEL CPUs?? Since Westmere possibly

They're not as badly affected as Intel, but they're affected.

Thanks for stating what is obvious to everyone... I'm still uisng my 45nm Intel system with XP, and I'll let you know if I get a rootkit while browsing the internet.

[mariushm]

Re: Some serious security bug in INTEL CPUs?? Since Westmere possibly

They're not as badly affected as Intel, but they're affected.
The CPUs are not vulnerable to all the issues Intel cpus are vulnerable to due to different design choices, and on those that affect them, the results are less severe.

See https://www.amd.com/en/corporate/sec...ragraph-290416

GPZ Variant 1 (Spectre) mitigation is provided through operating system updates that were made available previously by AMD ecosystem partners. GPZ Variant 3 (Meltdown) does not apply to AMD because of our processor design.

While we believe it is difficult to exploit Variant 2 on AMD processors, we actively worked with our customers and partners to deploy the above described combination of operating system patches and microcode updates for AMD processors to further mitigate the risk. A whitepaper detailing the AMD recommended mitigation for Windows is available, as well as links to ecosystem resources for the latest updates.


And for those other exploits reported by CTS Labs Research... I think there's already fixes for those even though all require administrative access (basically your system's fuxed already) : https://community.amd.com/community/...-labs-research

[mockingbird]

Re: Some serious security bug in INTEL CPUs?? Since Westmere possibly

yes, but amd is not so badly effected.
nice try though!

If they're not affected, then why are they bothering to release a microcode update?

[stj]

Re: Some serious security bug in INTEL CPUs?? Since Westmere possibly

yes, but amd is not so badly effected.
nice try though!

[mockingbird]

Re: Some serious security bug in INTEL CPUs?? Since Westmere possibly

Looks like Wolfdale will never get any updates. Intel updated their guidance April 2. Sounds like a bunch of BS to me for the reasons.

Just saw on Gamer Nexus, AMD is only releasing microcode updates from Bulldozer and up.

[Behemot]

Re: Some serious security bug in INTEL CPUs?? Since Westmere possibly

Still could work on it on the SW level I guess. Though some ppl reported signifficant performance los on Core 2 Quads with the SW patches.

[Per Hansson]

Re: Some serious security bug in INTEL CPUs?? Since Westmere possibly

Aye, bullshit it is
https://www.techspot.com/news/74014-...rocessors.html

While it's disappointing that Intel is leaving some legacy users out in the cold, it's not entirely surprising. As Tom's Hardware highlights, “the real reason Intel gave up on patching these systems seems to be that neither motherboard makers nor Microsoft may be willing to update systems sold a decade ago.”

[retiredcaps]

Re: Some serious security bug in INTEL CPUs?? Since Westmere possibly

Looks like Wolfdale will never get any updates. Intel updated their guidance April 2. Sounds like a bunch of BS to me for the reasons.

[Curious.George]

Re: Some serious security bug in INTEL CPUs?? Since Westmere possibly

yea, i allways liked nat semi'
they sent me entire databooks with a single phonecall, all TI sent for years was an order-form with prices.
i dont pay for design-data, so i didnt use TI chips!

When I lived in the midwest, I was reasonably friendly with the regional TI rep. So, "getting things" (databooks, samples -- even access to inside technical people) was relatively easy.

OTOH, once I moved away and had to deal with the "locals", things went downhill. I finally gave up on TI when they couldn't figure out how to get me off their "junk email" list (I simply closed the email account and cut them off, entirely!)

[stj]

Re: Some serious security bug in INTEL CPUs?? Since Westmere possibly

yea, i allways liked nat semi'
they sent me entire databooks with a single phonecall, all TI sent for years was an order-form with prices.
i dont pay for design-data, so i didnt use TI chips!

[Curious.George]

Re: Some serious security bug in INTEL CPUs?? Since Westmere possibly

i learned to never trust Intel after the "floating point bug incident".

for those too young,
Intel found / was told of a bug in the floating point unit.
the company response to the customers was:

"scientists" ??, yea and anybody else doing long floating point math, like AutoCad users and 3D gamers.
in other words - everybody!

Intel has historically been reluctant to "admit" problems. And, liked to spin problems as "features". Or, as "obvious consequences of the implementation" (yeah, but the implementation details of the chip are ONLY KNOWN TO INTEL INSIDERS!)

By contrast, on my first NS16032 design, the folks from National showed up with a STACK of "errata" (bug list). Instead of being intimidated ("OhMiGosh! What sort of crappy processor IS this??"), it was refreshingly honest: they knew of the problems, didn't choose to hide them and, presumably, were addressing workarounds.

"OK, I can work with that..."

[stj]

Re: Some serious security bug in INTEL CPUs?? Since Westmere possibly

i learned to never trust Intel after the "floating point bug incident".

for those too young,
Intel found / was told of a bug in the floating point unit.
the company response to the customers was:

high precision floating point math will only effect scientists and similar people - so live with it!

"scientists" ??, yea and anybody else doing long floating point math, like AutoCad users and 3D gamers.
in other words - everybody!

[bigbeark]

Re: Some serious security bug in INTEL CPUs?? Since Westmere possibly

The fun continues with BranchScope Side-channel CPU Vulnerability:

https://cdn.badcaps-static.com/pdfs/...10593eb6a9.pdf

Truly mind-boggling complexity - turned my brain to jello!

[Per Hansson]

Re: Some serious security bug in INTEL CPUs?? Since Westmere possibly

The fun continues with BranchScope Side-channel CPU Vulnerability:

https://cdn.badcaps-static.com/pdfs/...10593eb6a9.pdf

[hikaruichijo]

Re: Some serious security bug in INTEL CPUs?? Since Westmere possibly

Thanks a lot, I'm sorry. My fault.

[Per Hansson]

Re: Some serious security bug in INTEL CPUs?? Since Westmere possibly

It's being discussed in the linked thread hikaruichijo:
https://www.badcaps.net/forum/showth...691#post812691

[hikaruichijo]

Re: Some serious security bug in INTEL CPUs?? Since Westmere possibly

Mybe this deserves another thread but it seen the problems continue but now in the AMD side but they look biased and not fully reliable.

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/cts...pyc,36660.html
https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/new...lnerabilities/

Maybe we can rename meldown to "inteldown".
Well not sure what to think about these new discoverys, The company CTS Labs does not look very reliable and is based in Israel...

[retiredcaps]

Re: Some serious security bug in INTEL CPUs?? Since Westmere possibly

Trying out this chrome extension called chrome zero ...

"Chrome Extension Protects Against JavaScript-Based CPU Side-Channel Attacks"

https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/new...annel-attacks/