Page 12 of 12 FirstFirst ... 29101112
Results 177 to 186 of 186

Thread: Intel processor security flaw requires OS kernel level fix

  1. #177
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    394
    Thanks
    19
    Thanked
    52 times in 38 posts
    • adidan's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus P8Z77-M
      • CPU:
      • Intel i7 3770
      • Memory:
      • 16Gb Mushkin
      • Storage:
      • 2x240Gb HyperX Savage / 2x525Gb Crucial MX300
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Zotac GTX1080 Mini
      • PSU:
      • Be Quiet Dark Power Pro 650W
      • Case:
      • Antec ISK-600M
      • Operating System:
      • W7 64 Bit
      • Monitor(s):
      • 27" 1440p Iiyama XUB2792QSU

    Re: Intel processor security flaw requires OS kernel level fix

    noun: insider trading
    the illegal practice of trading on the stock exchange to one's own advantage through having access to confidential information.

    Edit: on top of that I believe some of the class action lawsuits are against Intel for allegedly misselling hardware they allegedly knew not to be secure.

    Allegedly...
    Grab that. Get that. Check it out. Bring that here. Grab anything useful. Take anything good.

  2. Received thanks from:

    CAT-THE-FIFTH (10-01-2018)

  3. #178
    Admin Team peterb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Southampton
    Posts
    17,203
    Thanks
    2,223
    Thanked
    2,783 times in 2,224 posts
    • peterb's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Nascom 2
      • CPU:
      • Z80B
      • Memory:
      • 48K 8 bit memory on separate card
      • Storage:
      • Audio cassette tape - home built 5.25" floppy drive
      • Graphics card(s):
      • text output (composite video)
      • PSU:
      • Home built
      • Case:
      • Home built
      • Operating System:
      • Nas-sys
      • Monitor(s):
      • 12" monocrome composite video input
      • Internet:
      • No networking capability on this machine

    Re: Intel processor security flaw requires OS kernel level fix

    Insider dealing is making a trade on privileged knowledge that is not available to the general public that might affect the share price. Examples might be if trading profits are likely to be higher or lower than forecast, or if there are merger or takeover talks.

    It would be fairly obvious that the announcement of a security flaw would adversely affect the share price, and if he knew that and acted on that knowledge before it was made public, then I would expect that to be a fairly strong case for insider dealing.

    However, it is up to the SEC to look at all the evidence and then come to a decision.
    (\__/)
    (='.'=)
    (")_(")

    Been helped or just 'Like' a post? Use the Thanks button!
    My broadband speed - 750 Meganibbles/minute

  4. Received thanks from:

    CAT-THE-FIFTH (11-01-2018)

  5. #179
    Registered+
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    15
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    0 times in 0 posts

    Re: Intel processor security flaw requires OS kernel level fix

    Strange, with the Intel risk tool it stated this...Status: This system is not vulnerable.
    Tool Stopped
    I have an i7-4960X running windows 10 Home. No patches installed identified in updates.

  6. #180
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    995
    Thanks
    150
    Thanked
    57 times in 52 posts
    • Xlucine's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Gigabyte Z97MX Gaming 5
      • CPU:
      • i5 4690K @stock, until I upgrade my graphics
      • Memory:
      • 16GB @2133 11-11-11-27
      • Storage:
      • Crucial MX500 512GB, 2TB storage
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVGA 980ti
      • PSU:
      • Seasonic S12G-550
      • Case:
      • Silverstone TJ08-E
      • Operating System:
      • W10
      • Monitor(s):
      • Viewsonic vx3211-2k-mhd, Dell P2414H
      • Internet:
      • Virgin 150 mb fibre

    Re: Intel processor security flaw requires OS kernel level fix

    Quote Originally Posted by lesoudeur View Post
    Strange, with the Intel risk tool it stated this...Status: This system is not vulnerable.
    Tool Stopped
    I have an i7-4960X running windows 10 Home. No patches installed identified in updates.
    Intel chips are so full of bugs everyone's struggling to keep track of them. That tool is to detect the glaring flaws in the Intel Management Engine (A buggy hardware network-connected backdoor), whereas the speculative code execution is completely different (and every haswell CPU is vulnerable, along with others)

  7. #181
    Tangential CAT-THE-FIFTH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Planet Of The Moose
    Posts
    26,264
    Thanks
    2,879
    Thanked
    3,991 times in 3,096 posts
    • CAT-THE-FIFTH's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Less E-PEEN
      • CPU:
      • Massive E-PEEN
      • Memory:
      • RGB E-PEEN
      • Storage:
      • Not in any order
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVEN BIGGER E-PEEN
      • PSU:
      • OVERSIZED
      • Case:
      • UNDERSIZED
      • Operating System:
      • DOS 6.22
      • Monitor(s):
      • NOT USUALLY ON....WHEN I POST
      • Internet:
      • FUNCTIONAL

    Re: Intel processor security flaw requires OS kernel level fix

    Quote Originally Posted by kompukare View Post
    Computerbase went and ran some more meaningful benchmarksthis time with the Meltdown patch and the Spectre microcode updates:
    https://www.computerbase.de/2018-01/...el-benchmarks/

    They ran these with KabyLake, SandyBridge and Ryzen all under both Win7 and Win10.

    Only the Kabylake system had the BIOS microcode update though, so if/when some of the other CPUs get updates these benches will have to be re-run yet again.

    For Kabylake the worst performance drop seems to Assassin's Creed Origins which suffered a 9% slowdown:

    and disk IO where 4KibQ32T1 seems have suffered a lot.


    Sandy Bridge suffered around 16% in AC:O

    [Yes it looks like CB have to fix their label there.]

    Ryzen didn't suffer any slowdowns from the new patches but then it shouldn't at least for Meltdown. We'll have to see what if anything AMD's microcode update for Spectre brings.
    They tested some other games and it seems minimums were affected in all of them.

    I tried FO4 for the first time after the update and it seems to have worst minimums too now - there are more dips under 30FPS it appears. Like I said I run a few 100 mods and like building up my settlements,and a normal HDD is now unplayable without an SSD.

    I did try and uninstall the update to see if the performance improved,but windows said it needed a reboot and then automatically installed the update again. FFS.

    However,in the end I still need to run with the update anyway so its a moot point.

    Edit!!

    I think as a result of this I will be most definitely edging towards AMD for my next upgrade - I just hope Ryzen+ or RR has a good performance improvement in FO4,etc over Ryzen MK1.


    Go!Go! Gadget Underpants!

  8. #182
    Registered+
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    15
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    0 times in 0 posts

    Re: Intel processor security flaw requires OS kernel level fix

    Quote Originally Posted by Xlucine View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by lesoudeur View Post
    Strange, with the Intel risk tool it stated this...Status: This system is not vulnerable.
    Tool Stopped
    I have an i7-4960X running windows 10 Home. No patches installed identified in updates.
    Intel chips are so full of bugs everyone's struggling to keep track of them. That tool is to detect the glaring flaws in the Intel Management Engine (A buggy hardware network-connected backdoor), whereas the speculative code execution is completely different (and every haswell CPU is vulnerable, along with others)
    OK thanks for the information

  9. #183
    root Member DanceswithUnix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    In the middle of a core dump
    Posts
    7,971
    Thanks
    323
    Thanked
    755 times in 654 posts
    • DanceswithUnix's system
      • Motherboard:
      • M5A-97 EVO R2.0
      • CPU:
      • FX-8350
      • Memory:
      • 16GB ECC 1333
      • Storage:
      • 660GB Linux, 500GB Games (Win 10)
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Sapphire Nitro R9 380 4GB
      • PSU:
      • 650W Corsair TX
      • Case:
      • Antec 300
      • Operating System:
      • Fedora 24 + Win 10 Pro 64 (yuk)
      • Monitor(s):
      • Benq XL2730Z 1440p + Samsung 2343BW 2048x1152
      • Internet:
      • 80Mb/20Mb VDSL

    Re: Intel processor security flaw requires OS kernel level fix

    Quote Originally Posted by peterb View Post
    It would be fairly obvious that the announcement of a security flaw would adversely affect the share price, and if he knew that and acted on that knowledge before it was made public, then I would expect that to be a fairly strong case for insider dealing.
    Processor/chipset bugs are business as usual at Intel, you could almost say he would be insider trading if he made use of knowing there *wasn't* going to be a security flaw announced in one of the products.

    Sandy bridge chipset SATA bug and Pentium FDIV resulted in expensive product recalls. Meltdown will probably result in Intel selling replacement processors.

    Intel's share price has started to recover already, I can't see him being prosecuted over this.

  10. #184
    Admin Team peterb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Southampton
    Posts
    17,203
    Thanks
    2,223
    Thanked
    2,783 times in 2,224 posts
    • peterb's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Nascom 2
      • CPU:
      • Z80B
      • Memory:
      • 48K 8 bit memory on separate card
      • Storage:
      • Audio cassette tape - home built 5.25" floppy drive
      • Graphics card(s):
      • text output (composite video)
      • PSU:
      • Home built
      • Case:
      • Home built
      • Operating System:
      • Nas-sys
      • Monitor(s):
      • 12" monocrome composite video input
      • Internet:
      • No networking capability on this machine

    Re: Intel processor security flaw requires OS kernel level fix

    Quote Originally Posted by DanceswithUnix View Post
    Processor/chipset bugs are business as usual at Intel, you could almost say he would be insider trading if he made use of knowing there *wasn't* going to be a security flaw announced in one of the products.

    Sandy bridge chipset SATA bug and Pentium FDIV resulted in expensive product recalls. Meltdown will probably result in Intel selling replacement processors.

    Intel's share price has started to recover already, I can't see him being prosecuted over this.
    Probably not (up to the SEC of course) but it would be interesting to know if he bought them back after the price slumped.
    (\__/)
    (='.'=)
    (")_(")

    Been helped or just 'Like' a post? Use the Thanks button!
    My broadband speed - 750 Meganibbles/minute

  11. #185
    root Member DanceswithUnix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    In the middle of a core dump
    Posts
    7,971
    Thanks
    323
    Thanked
    755 times in 654 posts
    • DanceswithUnix's system
      • Motherboard:
      • M5A-97 EVO R2.0
      • CPU:
      • FX-8350
      • Memory:
      • 16GB ECC 1333
      • Storage:
      • 660GB Linux, 500GB Games (Win 10)
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Sapphire Nitro R9 380 4GB
      • PSU:
      • 650W Corsair TX
      • Case:
      • Antec 300
      • Operating System:
      • Fedora 24 + Win 10 Pro 64 (yuk)
      • Monitor(s):
      • Benq XL2730Z 1440p + Samsung 2343BW 2048x1152
      • Internet:
      • 80Mb/20Mb VDSL

    Re: Intel processor security flaw requires OS kernel level fix

    Quote Originally Posted by peterb View Post
    Probably not (up to the SEC of course) but it would be interesting to know if he bought them back after the price slumped.
    That would be pretty dumb, which doesn't count it out of course

  12. #186
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    1,798
    Thanks
    158
    Thanked
    163 times in 118 posts

    Re: Intel processor security flaw requires OS kernel level fix

    Quote Originally Posted by DanceswithUnix View Post
    Processor/chipset bugs are business as usual at Intel...
    It's not just Intel, what with the complexity of modern day silicon it would be pretty hard to have a fault free CPU.

    Just picking one at random AMD Family 16h has a long list of errata (PDF Warning)

    Quote Originally Posted by peterb View Post
    Probably not (up to the SEC of course) but it would be interesting to know if he bought them back after the price slumped.
    And based on their history the chances are pretty low, IIRC they've only ever taken two 'big' company CEO's to task over insider trading since they were formed, that and most multinational CEO's are lawyered up to the hilt when buying or selling their own companies stocks.

Page 12 of 12 FirstFirst ... 29101112

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •