Intlel responds to security research findings

newsroom.intel.com/news/intel-responds-to-security-research-findings/

This has to be the worst damage control attempt ever.
>bbut it doesn't affect intel only!!!
>Intel believes its products are the most secure

Other urls found in this thread:

pcper.com/news/General-Tech/Its-good-day-be-AMD-kernel?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
fool.com/investing/2017/12/19/intels-ceo-just-sold-a-lot-of-stock.aspx
archive.is/e9P8K
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

THOSE GODDAMN RUSSIANS RREEEEEEEEE

Fuck this shit. I'll never fall for intel's Jewish tricks again. Next build is gonna be AMD CPU+GPU.

>Intel believes its products are the most secure in the world and that, with the support of its partners, the current solutions to this issue provide the best possible security for its customers.
kek

>it's n-not only us guise, AMD has the s-same p-problem, stop b-buying ryzen reeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

>click link
>ctrl+f
>glue
>0 results

So disappointed right now.

>Intel believes its products are the most secure in the world
people also believe in god

>any performance impacts are workload-dependent, and, for the average computer user, should not be significant and will be mitigated over time

This is the most Jewish thing I've read this year.

Nice way to start the year. Already bought some intel stock at a discount. It's already recouping from its 6% slide to 3% dip.

Normies will forget in about a month an a half.

it's over. they took too long to respond
pcper.com/news/General-Tech/Its-good-day-be-AMD-kernel?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

they failed to shut it down quickly and now the goyim knows.

>an industry-wide approach
won't cut it anymore

>Trusting an Israeli company
>Trusting Jews

But it's actually true though.

this

Which non-intel processors are affected exactly?

T. Amd marketing

None. It's pure FUD.

I think intel has come out and offered a very good explanation of the issue and adressed in in a very quick manner. I am confident that intel works hard to provide the most secure and stable platform out there and i am very satisfied with my intel processor.

As they have stated, this is an issue that not only affects the intel lineup but also our competitors.

t intlel

>cloud providers with billions invested in intel chips will start switching to AMD

It'll get patched and people will forget about it.

>industry-wide approach
"we fucked up so hard, everybody in IT will be affected."

>fool.com/investing/2017/12/19/intels-ceo-just-sold-a-lot-of-stock.aspx
Mothefucker knew the boat was gonna sink so he proceeded to sell his stock and only kept the necessary to remain CEO. This whole affair should be investigated.

t. Volkswagen executive

>cloud providers who already run at near-max capacity will forget about the 30% performance hit

retard

...

non-jew link
archive.is/e9P8K

Have you seen the benchmarks? It's literally nothing. Not even memeing here. We're talking ~2% performance drop in every task they tested. I wanted Intel to get fucked this time but I'm not a pathetic shill that has to resort to lies.

Gigolo jew

>Where were you when Intel kill
>I was home gayming
>Intel virus bad
>I laugh in ryzen

Didn't affect me kek. So like 90% of this board probably has Intel shit right?

Just look at the benchmarks, du -s and PostgreSQL are hurt because they do excessive disk IO, benchmarks for video decoding and gaming (latter on Windows) show negligible degradation.

>watching an era end right before my very eyes

Let's not rake Intel over the coals for this. They still offer the most secure processors on the market today.

>>On AMD CPUs in the Ryzen family, there's a nasty bug in which the CPUs malfunction if they execute code from the highest canonical page. They'll speculate right off the end of the canonical space, and bad things happen.

AYYMD IS FINISHED & BANKRUPT

This, heads are bound to roll.

>bbc already said that amd are not affected
>bloomberg also did
>reuters did too

it's out of containment. there's no shutting it down now.

the patch slows down the system tho

> any performance impacts are workload-dependent, and, for the average computer user, should not be significant and will be mitigated over time.

I run a datacenter with 200+ physical Windows servers and over 400 VMs running on Intel blade servers. I've yet to read any definitive answer regarding whether Xeons are about to get raped or not, but if so, fuck the average computer user

>they sold me gimped shit again but i don't care

cuck, have some dignity

Intel has alwayss been focused on ensuring the security of their customers computing environments. They are committed to rapidly addressing issues as they arise, and providing recommendations through security advisories and security notices.
There isn't a more secure product out there.

well yeah they do believe it

f

Hello pajeet

this
and if you don't have a Intel™ Faraday Cage for your intel cpu, it's really your fault

If it was released in the last 10 years, yes.

Hello intel. Sorry to hear about the end of your life. You won't be missed.

...

>Intel has always been focused on ensuring the security of their customers

heh

>Contrary to some reports, any performance impacts are workload-dependent
So exactly what the reports say.
>for the average computer user, should not be significant and will be mitigated over time.
>mitigated over time.
Motherfucking jews I will not fall for your scams again. FUCK YOU INTEL.

I REALLY wish we hadn't refreshed our hardware over the last two years. I want our old IBM shit back.

Nice try, Goldberg, but you can't hide the truth anymore. Even msm is reporting this now.

>Intel believes its products are the most secure in the world and that, with the support of its partners, the current solutions to this issue provide the best possible security for its customers.

>good response
go home, your shill is showing.

more like
>they probably knew it all along and hoped to keep it compartmentalized instead of reviewing their prefecth algos. Or rather, they've most likely been trying to fix it on the hardware level for a long time but kept losing their IPC advantange over AMD and simply decided to keep the liability on.

>Recent reports that these exploits are caused by a “bug” or a “flaw” and are unique to Intel products are incorrect. Based on the analysis to date, many types of computing devices — with many different vendors’ processors and operating systems — are susceptible to these exploits.
What did they mean by this?

refunds when?

ME backdoor, now this "most secure in the world"...

>oh shit, he countered me with facts, better call him a cuck

>State they are not the only ones affected when they are in fact the only ones
How will shareholders react to this? They know now that any future press release may also be full of shit.

>>mitigated over time.
That means when you upgrade your perfectly fine performance wise Sandy/Ivy Bridge CPU, goy.

The average user isn't the problem

Google is not an average fucking user

>Have you seen the benchmarks?
Yes. Have you? I/O, database accesses and hardware interrupts are not negligible stuff, especially on data centers.

This is typical PR team response. It doesn't admit anything (because that doesn't drive their own benefit).

A 30% lesser processing speed would still be 85.7% faster than anything AMD offers. True fact. Kek.

for consumers windows systems, the performance impact will probably be zero

>Intel believes its products are the most secure in the world
Sounds like "The only DEMOCRACY in Middle East" bullshit.

According to Intel, right?

Even the Linux patch authors recognised at minimum a 5% performance hit. Do you think Microsoft is going to do that much better?

I don't give a fuck about google or some other jew shit corporation, though
they have enough money to upgrade shit if need be

You are quite correct.
It's all just fearmongering from the alex jones tier tinfoil hat wearing fedoralords.

Are you implying that you are running a data center from your mother's basement?

I wonder how much Moot knows about this issue. He's at Google after all.

>our

Nice shilling faggot, but Ryzen isn't 30% less fast than the same spec'd CPU's from intel. Now remember how much more money you have to spend on Intel.

It's going to be a bloodbath.

Is there a fix for the ME back door?

>I don't give a fuck about google or some other jew shit corporation

I use google every goddamn day, them losing 30% is fucking dial up-tier

Holy fuck the entire Intel PR department is shilling Sup Forums right now.

>Which is why Intel and other vendors had planned to disclose this issue next week when more software and firmware updates will be available.
Yeah so you could sell most of your stocks before the whole plane crashes, motherfucker jews.

There will be no patch needed that impacts performance, since the practical security impact is only for companies that host potentially unsafe virtual machines

just bend over.

>Other processors can get bugs too

The CEO of Intel sold all but the minimum that Intel bylaws require him to keep already.

He fucking knew in mid-December, and cashed out before the price tanked and he's forced to resign

Google and all other tech gigants run (and will continue to run) intel processors for their security, speed and stability. Are you saying you know better than your tech expert heroes?

You use Google captcha to post here if you don't buy Sup Forums pass.

So basically this is the end of the Cloud?

So when will a patch be available for my GamesOS?
Should I just stop using the internet until then?

mods delete blatant shilling now?
oO"

hopefully

>implying moot didn't implement this while secretly working for intlel

you don't think he operated this site without any real income, did you?

Mods are shills

Don't try and fight the Sup Forums hivemind with logic and reason, user.

In a few months this'll all be fixed and blow over and it'll be like nothing ever happened at all.

But no, INTEL IS FINISHED LUL. Yeah, just like how all those other huge, massive international companies were finished after some sort of minor scandal.

oh wait

Sup Forums is powered by intel.

So are 99% of all other websites who rely on stability and security.

Nice b8 m8.

All virtualized software is affected. There's no such thing as "unsafe" virtual machines. They're ALL equally vulnerable.

Shlomotel kiked this one hard

Intel is intentionally conflating the KPTI patch, which has advantages in multiple security situations of varying degrees, with their specific hardware flaw, which absolutely requires the patch to keep even the pretense of a secure OS.

its a hardware bug, not software. hardware bugs take a year if not more to fix.

this isnt a minor scandal. jerry sandusky was a minor scandal. this affects everyone.

Some pplications make a shitload of syscalls.

Someone from reddit:
For virtual instruments, the sample engines will typically load their most-used samples into an LRU cache upon open. As you run the instrument, unloaded samples that are needed will be streamed to the audio output and then cached, evicting less recently used samples. For a small piano piece, this isn't much of an issue as the entire instrument may use anywhere from 5 GB to 50 GB of different samples throughout the piece. For much larger projects (such as full orchestras) then the demand grows to about 100-500 GB of samples having to be streamed or played over an entire piece.
The current solution to speed and memory restrictions is to "bounce" the stem to disk (process the track's channels individually and store them on disk) and then stream from disk to keep RAM open for other plugins and sample engines on other tracks. However some projects have deadlines that are too tight that this convenience can't be afforded, and thus all samples have to be streamed off of disk in real time.
It's also compounded by the fact that most of the audio processing happens on devices using often software-specific DSP chips. As such, system calls are usually made every x number of PCM samples per channel to send packets to be processed more efficiently than a CPU can.
So basically for us who do sound and music, this is a nightmare scenario about to happen. A quick search for pops, clicks, and overloads in DAWs reveals that total system resources and internal bandwidth are the biggest issues users face with it increasing in occurrence as demand for higher quality rises. Even the top in the industry (Hans Zimmer, Ben Burtt, etc.) butt heads with computational limits constantly. The outcome of this is not going to be pretty.
Source: Worked for a sampling company as a programmer. There are a lot more syscalls in audio software than people realize. 30% may end up being a more conservative estimate based on what I've seen.

new socket when?
are they going 2 per year instead of one now?
wait, actually, 4 instead of two..

you are not viewing this from practical attack vector perspective.

for consumers, they must no install malware to be safe..same as before

And yet it has a software fix which a negligible performance impact, and all non-shilling sources I've seen indicate that AMD is affected as well.

>b-b-but some AMD employee said they weren't!
Yeah, of fucking COURSE they would say that.

This is minor. Not worth talking about. Intel outperforms Ryzen in gaming.

no, 6 instead of 3.
i think.

>x86 is 2018

>non-shilling sources I've seen indicate that AMD is affected as well

You have some really shit sources. Patches have already been accepted into the Linux kernel that act as if AMD DOES NOT have this problem.