Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: Load Value Injection (LVI) flaws of Intel CPUs described

  1. #1
    HEXUS.admin
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    29,935
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    1,938 times in 679 posts

    Load Value Injection (LVI) flaws of Intel CPUs described

    'Reverse Meltdown' attack could facilitate the stealing of sensitive data from Intel SGX enclaves.
    Read more.

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    1,620
    Thanks
    10
    Thanked
    74 times in 65 posts

    Re: Load Value Injection (LVI) flaws of Intel CPUs described

    Oh look another one....

  3. #3
    Hardcore Tory, Lost Cause Ttaskmaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Reading, UK
    Posts
    6,055
    Thanks
    325
    Thanked
    659 times in 554 posts
    • Ttaskmaster's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus X99-PRO
      • CPU:
      • i7 5960X o/c to 4.summat
      • Memory:
      • 32GB 3200MHz Crucial Ballistix Tactical Tracer RGB DDR4
      • Storage:
      • Samsung Evo 120GB and Seagate Baracuda 2TB
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Gigabyte G1 GTX980Ti
      • PSU:
      • EVGA Supernova G2 1000W
      • Case:
      • Phanteks Enthoo Luxe wiv perspex window
      • Operating System:
      • Win10 64 Home
      • Monitor(s):
      • Acer Predator XB270HU 1440 IPS GSync
      • Internet:
      • BT 0.7Mbps 'In The Sticks' version

    Re: Load Value Injection (LVI) flaws of Intel CPUs described

    OMG Intel stuff has flaws and is vunerable to people stealing all your datas.
    Don't nobody buy Intel stuff ever again.....!!
    _______________________________________________________________________
    I dare anything... I am Skeletor!!!!

  4. #4
    Senior Member AGTDenton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bracknell
    Posts
    1,601
    Thanks
    358
    Thanked
    249 times in 183 posts
    • AGTDenton's system
      • Motherboard:
      • ASUS P6T7 WS Supercomputer
      • CPU:
      • Intel Core i7 980
      • Memory:
      • 24GB Corsair Dominator GT
      • Storage:
      • OCZ Vector + HDDs
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Inno3D GTX 980 iChill Herculez X4 Air Boss Ultra
      • PSU:
      • Seasonic X-850W
      • Case:
      • Fractal Design Define XL
      • Operating System:
      • 10 Pro x64
      • Monitor(s):
      • BenQ
      • Internet:
      • 70MB using BT line

    Re: Load Value Injection (LVI) flaws of Intel CPUs described

    These have been happening for decades, I've never cared for a single one of them. Stroking my i7 980.


    Rigs:
    Main: ASUS P6T7 WS Supercomputer, i7 980, 24GB Corsair Dominator GT, OCZ Vectors + HDDs, Inno3D GTX 980 iChill Herculez X4 Air Boss Ultra, Seasonic X-850W, Fractal Design Define XL, 10 x64 Pro, Noctua DH14 + stock chassis fans

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    1,670
    Thanks
    99
    Thanked
    217 times in 157 posts

    Re: Load Value Injection (LVI) flaws of Intel CPUs described

    It's one thing to extract nominal data from a computer in use via memory/cache, it's another to breach the secure enclave that's meant to be so hidden from the overlying software/kernel and extract its information

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    ATLANTIS
    Posts
    966
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked
    23 times in 21 posts

    Re: Load Value Injection (LVI) flaws of Intel CPUs described

    severity rating : ..........MEDIUM MEDIUM MEDIUM.

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    By the sea
    Posts
    228
    Thanks
    19
    Thanked
    83 times in 50 posts
    • matts-uk's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Apple iMac
      • CPU:
      • Core i7 3.4Ghz
      • Memory:
      • 12GB DDR3
      • Storage:
      • RAID5 on the twin Xeon server I keep in the airing cupboard
      • Graphics card(s):
      • ATI 7970M
      • Case:
      • A lurvely slimline, all in one aluminium number.
      • Operating System:
      • OSX, Centos, Windows.
      • Monitor(s):
      • 27" LED (Apple), 24" LED (Apple), 2 x 20" TFT Dell
      • Internet:
      • ADSL rubbish

    Re: Load Value Injection (LVI) flaws of Intel CPUs described

    Quote Originally Posted by LSG501 View Post
    Oh look another one....
    https://www.theregister.co.uk/2020/03/09/amd_sidechannel_leak_report/

  8. #8
    RIP Peterb ik9000's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    5,801
    Thanks
    1,407
    Thanked
    934 times in 708 posts
    • ik9000's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus P7H55-M/USB3
      • CPU:
      • i7-870, Prolimatech Megahalems, 2x Akasa Apache 120mm
      • Memory:
      • 4x4GB Corsair Vengeance 2133 11-11-11-27
      • Storage:
      • 2x256GB Samsung 840-Pro, 1TB Seagate 7200.12, 1TB Seagate ES.2
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Gigabyte GTX 460 1GB SuperOverClocked
      • PSU:
      • NZXT Hale 90 750w
      • Case:
      • BitFenix Survivor + Bitfenix spectre LED fans, LG BluRay R/W optical drive
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 7 Professional
      • Monitor(s):
      • Dell U2414h, U2311h 1920x1080
      • Internet:
      • 200Mb/s Fibre and 4G wifi

    Re: Load Value Injection (LVI) flaws of Intel CPUs described

    Quote Originally Posted by matts-uk View Post
    https://www.theregister.co.uk/2020/03/09/amd_sidechannel_leak_report/
    nowhere near the same thing. Plus that, minor thought it was, had already been patched before it hit the news. Patched without performance penalty if I've understood.

    Here note too though that for trusted OS in controlled environments it is a non-issue. Smugly noting that my i7-870 is the generation before this SGX feature was introduced so hopefully I'm unaffected (for once!)

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    1,620
    Thanks
    10
    Thanked
    74 times in 65 posts

    Re: Load Value Injection (LVI) flaws of Intel CPUs described

    Quote Originally Posted by matts-uk View Post
    https://www.theregister.co.uk/2020/03/09/amd_sidechannel_leak_report/
    As said, nowhere near the same thing....

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    852
    Thanks
    8
    Thanked
    38 times in 30 posts
    • rob4001's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Gigabyte z97
      • CPU:
      • Xeon 1231 v3
      • Memory:
      • 16GB
      • Storage:
      • Samsung 840 256GB SSD
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Zotac GTX 1660 super
      • PSU:
      • Sliverstone 500w SFX-L
      • Case:
      • Silverstone SG13 mitx
      • Operating System:
      • windows 10 64 bit
      • Monitor(s):
      • Asus 27" 1440p
      • Internet:
      • Comcast 75MB

    Re: Load Value Injection (LVI) flaws of Intel CPUs described

    All theoretical attacks though

  11. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    1,670
    Thanks
    99
    Thanked
    217 times in 157 posts

    Re: Load Value Injection (LVI) flaws of Intel CPUs described

    Quote Originally Posted by rob4001 View Post
    All theoretical attacks though
    So there's no point protecting against it until it's exploited in the wild?

    I don't ever intend on having a car crash but i still drive safely and buy car insurance.

  12. #12
    Senior Member cptwhite_uk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    3,802
    Thanks
    441
    Thanked
    451 times in 331 posts
    • cptwhite_uk's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Gigabyte GA-Z77Z-UD3H
      • CPU:
      • Intel i5 3570k @ 4.2Ghz
      • Memory:
      • 16Gb DDR3 Corsair Vengeance LP 1600Mhz
      • Storage:
      • SanDisk Ultra II 960Gb SSD / 750Gb Samsung F1
      • Graphics card(s):
      • MSI Gaming X GTX1080 8Gb
      • PSU:
      • Corsair 550W VX
      • Case:
      • Fractal Design R4
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10 Home
      • Monitor(s):
      • Dell U2713HM (2560x1440 IPS Panel)
      • Internet:
      • Virgin Media 200Mbps

    Re: Load Value Injection (LVI) flaws of Intel CPUs described

    Reverse Meltdown? Will have to ask the wife about that one....

  13. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    By the sea
    Posts
    228
    Thanks
    19
    Thanked
    83 times in 50 posts
    • matts-uk's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Apple iMac
      • CPU:
      • Core i7 3.4Ghz
      • Memory:
      • 12GB DDR3
      • Storage:
      • RAID5 on the twin Xeon server I keep in the airing cupboard
      • Graphics card(s):
      • ATI 7970M
      • Case:
      • A lurvely slimline, all in one aluminium number.
      • Operating System:
      • OSX, Centos, Windows.
      • Monitor(s):
      • 27" LED (Apple), 24" LED (Apple), 2 x 20" TFT Dell
      • Internet:
      • ADSL rubbish

    Re: Load Value Injection (LVI) flaws of Intel CPUs described

    Quote Originally Posted by ik9000 View Post
    nowhere near the same thing.
    To be honest I linked the Register article as a little tongue in cheek prod at the AMD fanbois potentially false sense of security and smugness.

    I don't claim to be an expert on this by any means. I gave up writing assembly code after the MC68K, when I switched to Intel (around 1990). Apart from some hand patching of 80186 and custom Mitel stuff during overseas telecomms testing I haven't had to go lower than a C compiler for the last 25 years - and I am more than happy about that.

    ...But, from what I have read, these 'new' vulnerabilities are all variations on the similar theme of a side-channel attack, whereby high resolution timing is used to exploit CPU code prediction mechanisms, defeating access privileges imposed by the CPU. So while the attacks may be different in implementation and result, they [all] exploit a previously neglected attack vector that is potentially present in most all modern CPUs.

    Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. The researchers have proven Intel chips are vulnerable because Intel chips were the target of the research. Whatever the researchers have proved, they have not proven that other manufacturers are impervious to similarly crafted attacks.

    Here note too though that for trusted OS in controlled environments it is a non-issue. Smugly noting that my i7-870 is the generation before this SGX feature was introduced so hopefully I'm unaffected (for once!)
    Is there such a thing as a trusted OS? The point about these new side-channel attacks is they highlight that process and memory separation at the OS layer are 'virtual' features that do not survive the physical transition to silicone.

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
  •