Wow. US-CERT changes original advisory recommendation from "replace hardware" to "apply updates". v1: http://archive.is/vDbPx v2: https://www.kb.cert.org/vuls/id/584653 https://twitter.com/ryanaraine/status/948969182833524738 …
-
Show this thread
-
Replying to @kennwhite
Uhg. Yes patch as a short-term, partial, emergency mitigation. But you also need to plan to replace.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @RichFelker @kennwhite
I think I need more details. Plan to replace in the sense of accelerating the normal hardware replacement cycle? I see many pitfalls if so...
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
How do I sell upper management on the idea that, since Intel (or AMD, or ...) sold us defective hardware, so we need to purchase even more hardware from them than usual? That we reward them for the screw-up?
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
How do I sell them that spending money to mitigate this is *higher priority* than their other business strategies? Despite the fact that there is zero ROI, except for however we rationalize the risk mitigation as having some (funny money) value?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
It's really hard to say "oh, well, cost of doing business" with a straight face. If they *recalled* the defective processors and swapped out free, I can pass off the labor as a cost of doing business. But not *buying* replacements.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
Absolutely. This is why Intel needs to be held accountable. In the 90s they recalled a silly inconsequential FDIV bug. This is 10 orders of magnitude more severe.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.