Remember earlier this year, all the drama about AMD CPU flaws - we should follow that up. A thread.
Show this thread
-
Second, we weren't paid to "back up" anything to the press. We were paid for a thorough technical investigation of a piece of software. No one can pay me to lie, or hype anything and then promote it on their behalf.
Third, you'll note that even AMD cited our public analysis of the vulnerabilities in their reporting: https://community.amd.com/community/amd-corporate/blog/2018/03/21/initial-amd-technical-assessment-of-cts-labs-research … I'm not sure how you think I should have acted differently?
-
-
Personally I believe it was important you being paid by CTS Labs was mentioned in the reporting, because independent sources matter. However that’s up to reporters to establish and list.
-
An addendum to my earlier tweet. I didn't learn Trail of Bits had reviewed the PoCs under its standard fee arrangement until two days after I posted my article. ToB should have disclosed the arrangement sooner, and I and all other reporters should have noted it in their articles.
- 4 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
I was not even paid to write our blog post about those flaws. I wrote it because I felt the press around it was getting out of hand.
-
I’d be interested to know if anybody from press investigated who paid for the research (CTS Labs at the time declined to name the company) as I think that had a big impact to how the disclosure played out. The archive of the website is hilarious in hindsight.
End of conversation
New conversation -
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.