Huge Intel CPU Bug

[Simulacra53]

Still if we look at cars, if you have a defect that has a big impact you have to issue a recall and cover the cost of repair or replacement.

It is faulty hardware, not software.

If a company has to add 30% more cpu power I’d claim that money with the hardware company.

Today we discuss risk, tomorrow who has to pay for the structural solution,

It ould be an irony if the party responsible for the “faulty” hardware will earn billions in new “safe” CPU sales.

At 30% I’d be tempted to say we are clearly talking about replacement.

Do any of you remember the floating point CPU bug a decade ago?

[PipFromSlitherine]

Except (as I said) nobody is going to see a 30% reduction in performance in normal use. And frankly a bulletproof solution to this, that doesn't involve major performance hits across the board, isn't even known yet.

Cars are a poor example, as what you say is only true for safety issues. These problems are still only applicable to malware which has gotten onto your machine, same as any malware.

Nobody is going to get a new CPU over this. Though I am sure that plenty of lawyers will try and get rich from it, in their parasitic way.

Cheers

Pip

[rico21]

30%, 30%.........
That remember Juda and his story of 30%.[:D]

[Orm]

I am pretty sure that layers already earn more from protecting the big companies.

[Zecke]

yeap; thats the americans layers; in Europe we have the Napoleonic code; which means The lawyers stays in his buro; the american lawyers go outside of his buro haunting clients parasitic

[Simulacra53]

ORIGINAL: PipFromSlitherine

Except (as I said) nobody is going to see a 30% reduction in performance in normal use. And frankly a bulletproof solution to this, that doesn't involve major performance hits across the board, isn't even known yet.

Cars are a poor example, as what you say is only true for safety issues. These problems are still only applicable to malware which has gotten onto your machine, same as any malware.

Nobody is going to get a new CPU over this. Though I am sure that plenty of lawyers will try and get rich from it, in their parasitic way.

Cheers

Pip

Fine, as long as I have a choice - not a punishing one - to opt out of the fix.

[Lecivius]

Anything, virtually anything, connected to a LAN or WAN is open to exploit. Anyone with serious computational skills knows this. Compensation is a pipe dream that some shyster may try for a hardware issue, but it will fail. The hardware does work, after all. This is not as big as the Uconnect exploit, but gets more publicity due to scale. As stated previously, this is mostly damaging to HI-CAP servers. End users would need to be worried that someone would go through the huge headache of trying to code an exploit to infect machines, just to try to catch a certain frame.

Imagine a key logger, that was only good when a password was used in conjunction with a certain application, which then had to be forwarded, but only certain ones at certain times. Could it be done? Absolutely. But who on earth would want to, and why?

[Zecke]

[Simulacra53]

It is going to be a two level fix - system and bios.

Maybe I cannot hold off a Windows fix, but I’ll likely skip the bios one.

In general use your risk is very low to start with.