Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: AMD faces customer and shareholder Spectre lawsuits

  1. #1
    HEXUS.admin
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    27,276
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    1,680 times in 584 posts

    AMD faces customer and shareholder Spectre lawsuits

    There are now two class-action suits from shareholders and three on behalf of customers.
    Read more.

  2. #2
    Comrade Moose CAT-THE-FIFTH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Moosetopia
    Posts
    28,083
    Thanks
    3,096
    Thanked
    4,332 times in 3,360 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: AMD faces customer and shareholder Spectre lawsuits

    32 to 5,looks like Intel is "slightly" worse off.
    Last edited by CAT-THE-FIFTH; 23-02-2018 at 12:27 PM. Reason: Typo!


    Those despicable Elk,stealing the pond weed!

  3. Received thanks from:

    afiretruck (23-02-2018),Biscuit (23-02-2018)

  4. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Location
    My happy place
    Posts
    109
    Thanks
    28
    Thanked
    7 times in 7 posts
    • afiretruck's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Gigabyte X399 Designare Ex
      • CPU:
      • AMD Threadripper 1900X
      • Memory:
      • Corsair 32GB 3200MHz
      • Storage:
      • 500GB NVMe RAID 5 + 6TB HDD RAID 10
      • Graphics card(s):
      • RX Vega 64 (Linux), GTX 980Ti (Windows VM)
      • PSU:
      • Corsair RMi 850
      • Case:
      • Thermaltake Core X71
      • Operating System:
      • Arch Linux (Antergos)

    Re: AMD faces customer and shareholder Spectre lawsuits

    AMD claimed "near-zero risk of exploitation", yet still provided BIOS updates - a 'smoking gun' think lawyers.
    "near-zero" != "zero"

    If these BIOS updates make it "zero" or closer to that, then I don't see what the problem is here.

  5. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    MOMBASA
    Posts
    789
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked
    19 times in 18 posts

    Re: AMD faces customer and shareholder Spectre lawsuits

    We are so worried about spectre yet Microsoft and Google are siphoning all our sensitive data to their servers 'un-hidden' ...contacts...images...GPS information...name it!

  6. #5
    Anthropomorphic Personification shaithis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    The Last Aerie
    Posts
    10,761
    Thanks
    629
    Thanked
    864 times in 730 posts
    • shaithis's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus P8Z77 WS
      • CPU:
      • i7 3770k @ 4.5GHz
      • Memory:
      • 32GB HyperX 1866
      • Storage:
      • Lots!
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Sapphire Fury X
      • PSU:
      • Corsair HX850
      • Case:
      • Corsair 600T (White)
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10 x64
      • Monitor(s):
      • 2 x Dell 3007
      • Internet:
      • Zen 80Mb Fibre

    Re: AMD faces customer and shareholder Spectre lawsuits

    Quote Originally Posted by lumireleon View Post
    We are so worried about spectre yet Microsoft and Google are siphoning all our sensitive data to their servers 'un-hidden' ...contacts...images...GPS information...name it!
    The difference is, MS and Google aren't using the data to scam you, empty your bank accounts etc
    Main PC: Asus Rampage IV Extreme / 3960X@4.5GHz / Antec H1200 Pro / 32GB DDR3-1866 Quad Channel / Sapphire Fury X / Areca 1680 / 850W EVGA SuperNOVA Gold 2 / Corsair 600T / 2x Dell 3007 / 4 x 250GB SSD + 2 x 80GB SSD / 4 x 1TB HDD (RAID 10) / Windows 10 Pro, Yosemite & Ubuntu
    HTPC: AsRock Z77 Pro 4 / 3770K@4.2GHz / 24GB / GTX 1080 / SST-LC20 / Antec TP-550 / Hisense 65k5510 4K TV / HTC Vive / 2 x 240GB SSD + 12TB HDD Space / Race Seat / Logitech G29 / Win 10 Pro
    HTPC2: Asus AM1I-A / 5150 / 4GB / Corsair Force 3 240GB / Silverstone SST-ML05B + ST30SF / Samsung UE60H6200 TV / Windows 10 Pro
    Spare/Loaner: Gigabyte EX58-UD5 / i950 / 12GB / HD7870 / Corsair 300R / Silverpower 700W modular
    NAS 1: HP N40L / 12GB ECC RAM / 2 x 3TB Arrays || NAS 2: Dell PowerEdge T110 II / 24GB ECC RAM / 2 x 3TB Hybrid arrays || Network:Buffalo WZR-1166DHP w/DD-WRT + HP ProCurve 1800-24G
    Laptop: Lenovo Flex 2 / 12GB RAM / 240GB Corsair Force 3 Printer: HP CP1515n || Phone: HTC One U11 || Other: Samsung Galaxy Tab 4 Pro 10.1 CM12.1 / Playstation 4 + G29 + 2TB Hybrid drive

  7. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,264
    Thanks
    250
    Thanked
    260 times in 184 posts

    Re: AMD faces customer and shareholder Spectre lawsuits

    I do love the claim from shareholders that AMD unjustly profited from the sale of affected processors after knowing about the vulnerabilities, would they have preferred for them not to release an upcoming product, throw them all into a landfill, and write down all those assets.

    Doing that probably would have ended AMD and with it the value of their stocks.

  8. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    1,148
    Thanks
    5
    Thanked
    59 times in 51 posts

    Re: AMD faces customer and shareholder Spectre lawsuits

    While I'm not saying intel and to a lesser extent amd shouldn't be held responsible for the issues, this 'bug' wasn't found (supposedly) until roughly 10 years after the architectures that all these cpu's are based on was released....

    Also everything I've read so far seems to imply that AMD is 'easier' to fix, with less overall impact than intel, and they're actively doing this. So I don't see why them releasing a product that's been in 'development' for several years, so before we knew about spectre etc, is as bad as the shareholders are making out... this seems more like the shareholders are trying to get some quick cash than actually being concerned about users.

    Personally I don't mind the NDA part and keeping it quiet to allow time to sort a fix (unlike google who will release info about other companies bugs after 90 days no matter what)to 'protect users' because it's far more appropriate when it can affect a lot of users but the issue I have is that they didn't have the fixes ready to go on the planned date where the nda would be cancelled...especially intel. I could understand them being sued because of the 'delay' in fixing the 'bug'.

  9. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    101
    Thanks
    8
    Thanked
    5 times in 3 posts

    Re: AMD faces customer and shareholder Spectre lawsuits

    5 is still bad enough. Eric Cartman on you both.

  10. #9
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    154
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    3 times in 3 posts

    Re: AMD faces customer and shareholder Spectre lawsuits

    arm also.

  11. #10
    Senior Member Xlucine's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    1,360
    Thanks
    203
    Thanked
    100 times in 85 posts
    • Xlucine's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Gigabyte Z97MX Gaming 5
      • CPU:
      • i5 4690K @stock
      • Memory:
      • 16GB @2133 11-11-11-27
      • Storage:
      • Crucial MX500 1TB, Crucial MX100 512GB, 2TB hard disk
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVGA 980ti
      • PSU:
      • Seasonic S12G-550
      • Case:
      • Silverstone TJ08-E
      • Operating System:
      • W10 pro
      • Monitor(s):
      • Viewsonic vx3211-2k-mhd, Dell P2414H
      • Internet:
      • Virgin 150 mb fibre

    Re: AMD faces customer and shareholder Spectre lawsuits

    Quote Originally Posted by LSG501 View Post
    While I'm not saying intel and to a lesser extent amd shouldn't be held responsible for the issues, this 'bug' wasn't found (supposedly) until roughly 10 years after the architectures that all these cpu's are based on was released....

    Also everything I've read so far seems to imply that AMD is 'easier' to fix, with less overall impact than intel, and they're actively doing this. So I don't see why them releasing a product that's been in 'development' for several years, so before we knew about spectre etc, is as bad as the shareholders are making out... this seems more like the shareholders are trying to get some quick cash than actually being concerned about users.

    Personally I don't mind the NDA part and keeping it quiet to allow time to sort a fix (unlike google who will release info about other companies bugs after 90 days no matter what)to 'protect users' because it's far more appropriate when it can affect a lot of users but the issue I have is that they didn't have the fixes ready to go on the planned date where the nda would be cancelled...especially intel. I could understand them being sued because of the 'delay' in fixing the 'bug'.
    Google was part of the consortium fixing this, and held off on disclosure for well beyond the 90 day limit in this (spectre/meltdown) instance

  12. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    1,148
    Thanks
    5
    Thanked
    59 times in 51 posts

    Re: AMD faces customer and shareholder Spectre lawsuits

    Quote Originally Posted by Xlucine View Post
    Google was part of the consortium fixing this, and held off on disclosure for well beyond the 90 day limit in this (spectre/meltdown) instance
    Yes, and that's my point... if it affects them (ie their servers etc) they're more than happy to hold off past their self imposed 90 day limit on bugs that they find (they also found this one) but on things which could actually affect people a lot easier, ie a browser bug that isn't relating to chrome, they'll release it without any concern for how it might affect the public, even if a patch is actively being worked on.

  13. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    717
    Thanks
    43
    Thanked
    87 times in 55 posts

    Re: AMD faces customer and shareholder Spectre lawsuits

    Quote Originally Posted by LSG501 View Post
    Yes, and that's my point... if it affects them (ie their servers etc) they're more than happy to hold off past their self imposed 90 day limit on bugs that they find (they also found this one) but on things which could actually affect people a lot easier, ie a browser bug that isn't relating to chrome, they'll release it without any concern for how it might affect the public, even if a patch is actively being worked on.
    I think you're being a narrow minded/tin foil hat in your opinion there. There is a possibility that they took that reasoning or perhaps it's more because the vast majority of the "internet" we use is cloud hosted and these bugs allowed malicious entities to access data held within other customer islands. Azure and Amazon in that moment of discovery became one of the least secure systems, post intrusion mind, on the market. So that's why they held back, because releasing something that affects...pretty much 100% of all systems out there has a CPU in it is a pretty big problem. Could you imagine the types of malware that could have been made and deployed worldwide. It could have disassembled every form of security we know in a matter of days/weeks (extremist doomsayer over). It'll make Wannacry, heartbleed and the lovebug look like a mild ant infestation.

    So it was in the worlds best interest that they hold back. Now, your point about small software which in the grand scheme of things is less complex and less likely to affect the world as a greater whole is a different story. 90 days is generally more than enough time to devote resources to identify the issue, analyse the issue, fix the issue and perform limited QC and then release to the public. What Google is doing is a double edge blade, they are saying to software developers: "Pull your socks up else we'll rip your pants down, sort it out". But Software developers are inherently lazy due to management, oversight, lack of information and many other factors.

    Google is forcing companies to publicly acknowledge their problems if they don't sort them out first. One of the biggest problems in tech today is when companies want to "dust the problems under the rug" and most of the time, they get away with it.

    The reason why it's a double edged blade is if the software developer does not release a fix then they've just announced that vulnerability to the malicious world and it's open season.

    To me, that side of Google is a "Chaotic Good" type of person.

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
  •