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

[Curious.George]

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

Win7 and Win8.1 users can't either.
Microsoft stopped releasing individual updates some months ago.
Now it's a cumulative update released each month that contains all previous updates.

The update catalog doesn't let you "fetch" individual updates anymore?

[Per Hansson]

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

They don't package the updates individually anymore.
https://blogs.technet.microsoft.com/...ows-7-and-8-1/

https://blogs.technet.microsoft.com/...d-windows-8-1/

[Curious.George]

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

They don't package the updates individually anymore.
https://blogs.technet.microsoft.com/...ows-7-and-8-1/

https://blogs.technet.microsoft.com/...d-windows-8-1/

I was aware of the monthly rollups (I use them to expedite building W7 systems -- instead of applying hundreds of individual updates like the XP days). But, I had thought one could still "fetch" individual updates, as well. E.g., via WUA.

So, my strategy going forward should be to apply monthly rollups -- after first imaging the system to give a rollback point -- until I encounter something that I "don't want". Then, fix that point in time as the last practical update for the OS?

[IIRC, 7even is nearing EOL so I won't have to worry about this for much longer; I'll just avoid any application updates that require a newer OS!]

[Topcat]

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

Probably because it's just you assessing your personal risk and being comfortable with it. E.g., I won't even bother installing any patch as most of my machines aren't "exposed" for the exploit to take hold.

OTOH, if you were a corporation that had product based on those devices in the market, you'd be worrying about your financial and legal exposure. Imagine someone using this exploit to hack all the PC-based cash registers that are in use and being the company that manufactured them!

Or, if you had 3000 seats running on that hardware in your business and suddenly had to worry about all of them being potentially compromised. Or, all being potential attack vectors to other systems in your organization.

well duhhh....

[Curious.George]

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

well duhhh....

I suspect it is a real nightmare for those folks -- deciding whether to apply the patch, applying it and then adjusting the "planned" normal equipment upgrade schedule to reflect this "bump" (maybe there will be a sudden surge in equipment discards -- could be a windfall for me, personally! )

Have to feel sorry for the folks who do that sort of thing for a living; always being the dog's tail...

[Per Hansson]

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

I was aware of the monthly rollups (I use them to expedite building W7 systems -- instead of applying hundreds of individual updates like the XP days). But, I had thought one could still "fetch" individual updates, as well. E.g., via WUA.

So, my strategy going forward should be to apply monthly rollups -- after first imaging the system to give a rollback point -- until I encounter something that I "don't want". Then, fix that point in time as the last practical update for the OS?

[IIRC, 7even is nearing EOL so I won't have to worry about this for much longer; I'll just avoid any application updates that require a newer OS!]

Well, you could always pray to the "god" that they fix the issue too
But seriously this is getting quite off topic now!

[Curious.George]

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

But seriously this is getting quite off topic now!

Yup -- though important for those of us who are interested in avoiding the "forced upgrade" scenario.

[stj]

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

let me give you a quick abreviated version.

if you use Intel and/or m$ your pretty fucked.
if you use AMD with Linux you probably have a smile on your face.

[Curious.George]

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

let me give you a quick abreviated version.

if you use Intel and/or m$ your pretty fucked.
if you use AMD with Linux you probably have a smile on your face.

I think that's overly simplistic. I see nothing in W7 (or any of its predecessors) that is a "time bomb"; I can keep them and the software they have running on them, currently, until the hardware shits the bed. OTOH, I've heard folks gripe about bitchware that tried to coerce them into moving to 10...

OTOH, if I naively install an update that decides to FORCE me to move to 10 (or other), then I need to be sure I can roll that back -- i.e., by having saved an image (not a "restore point" cuz the OS still has control over that!) prior to applying the unfortunate update.

As most MS updates seem to be for "security" and to protect from external/remote exploits, I can gladly live without them (machines are air-gapped/not routed). I'm already living with the inherent deficiencies of the OS's that MS hasn't considered important enough to fix ("just reboot!")

[redwire]

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

Full details and research papers and source code: https://spectreattack.com, Spectre Attack.pdf research paper

Meanwhile, Raspberry Pi is not affected. Hurrah.

[diif]

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

let me give you a quick abreviated version.

if you use Intel and/or m$ your pretty fucked.
if you use AMD with Linux you probably have a smile on your face.

Time to pull the Dell Mini 9 with Atom CPU out of storage and put Linux on its SSD

[stj]

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

i'm lucky, i'm posting this from a laptop with an AMD dual-core cpu in it.
unfortunatly all my other Laptops have fucking Intel in them.

[Curious.George]

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

Time to pull the Dell Mini 9 with Atom CPU out of storage and put Linux on its SSD

Atom A, C, E, X3 and Z series are affected.

I suspect my SPARCs are troublefree -- but, I don't want to sit next to a spaceheater just to browse the web!

[lti]

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

let me give you a quick abreviated version.

if you use Intel and/or m$ your pretty fucked.
if you use AMD with Linux you probably have a smile on your face.

What else is wrong with Intel CPUs besides the performance drop in certain applications (not everything like the gamers think)?

AMD CPUs are affected by Spectre, so you need to switch to VIA.

[stj]

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

i have that, a via c7 based itx board.

or fire-up the SGI systems and run IRIX.
now those are great for cold weather - not so good on hot days!

[eccerr0r]

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

Which MIPS CPU? The scalar ones should be safe from Spectre as well. I don't know about the R10K, someone should test one of these (which may be tricky as the code currently is specially for x86/amd64 SSE2 right now).

I've been trying to find someone with an Alpha AXP to try Spectre, which may also be affected. However, 486's should be safe as it's a scalar processor...

[stj]

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

they are mostly R10,000 and one R4400
i was going to try an R12,000 upgrade but never got round to it.

[diif]

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

Atom A, C, E, X3 and Z series are affected.

I suspect my SPARCs are troublefree -- but, I don't want to sit next to a spaceheater just to browse the web!

The Mini 9 has an N270.

[eccerr0r]

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

I also have an N270 Atom in my eeePC. I'm glad, it doesn't need to get any slower than it already is...

I need to rebuild all its binaries too, ugh. The pains of running a source based distribution that decided to make an across-the-board change...

----

Yes, the R10K will need to be tested. I think the R4000/R4400 were scalar and shouldn't have these issues.

----

And I just patched my i7 (linux) for Meltdown... it's not dastardly slower, fortunately. Unsure about Spectre yet. On the good side, machines that don't constantly download code (or is forced to download code) is "safe" for now - so fixed job (i.e. not ssh or other shell box type) servers are OK to leave unpatched temporarily. Client machines and shell boxes, however, must be patched ASAP as likely they will be fed new code on a continual basis (like javascript...)

[RJARRRPCGP]

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

spaceheater

Best describes my 2008 Core 2 Quad "Kentsfield" Q6600 at around 3.0 Ghz. LOL.