A small s**tstorm is heading your way, if you're in the business of running code on Intel computers. Here's a sad story about the state of computing in 2019. It'll take a couple of tweets, but it's actually kind of important (?), so please retweet so this gets proper attention:
-
Show this thread
-
Replying to @damageboy
Is nobody attacking AMD, or is there some difference in design philosophy that has spared them from this wave of chip attacks?
4 replies 0 retweets 14 likes -
Replying to @geofurb @damageboy
This isn't a chip attack, it's a stupid design bug. That said, there *is* a difference in design philosophy. Intel has chosen performance over any kind of design sanity / safety, every time, it seems as a systematic rule. AMD hasn't.
2 replies 11 retweets 87 likes -
So while both AMD and Intel have been equally hit by the general idea of speculation-based leaks in userland code (nothing the CPU can do about that), Intel has also had a huge pile of massively privilege-crossing speculation leaks that AMD hasn't.
2 replies 2 retweets 25 likes -
Because the Intel philosophy seems to have been "ignore security/sanity until the instruction retires", so all kinds of batshit insane stuff happens in speculation on Intel CPUs (like bypassing guest VM page tables or loading bad or privileged data) which doesn't on AMD.
3 replies 2 retweets 36 likes -
This “ignore security/sanity” sentiment that intel “has” is completely false; Intel internally has never had that philosophy. That’s something cooked up by reddit trolls.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
The evidence is damning. All those speculation bugs Intel had due to cross-privilege leakage prior to retirement make it clear. It's not once or twice, it's a pattern.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes
By the way, I said "ignore security/sanity *until the instruction retires*". They cared about the security of the end result, they just didn't care about security along the way, and as anyone well versed in security knows, that's a recipe for disaster. Defense in depth.
-
-
So are you suggesting it was outright outright malicious intent or laziness? Or both?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @SteakandChickn @marcan42 and
Also – unless you’ve had engineers themselves tell you this, I wouldn’t say it’s “defense in depth”
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes - Show replies
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.