Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

MDS: The Newest Speculative Execution Side-Channel Vulnerability

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • hotaru
    replied
    Originally posted by Xwaang View Post

    So if someone with a bugged Intel chip wants to be safe, he/she must disable smt (hyperthreading) until he/she changes its cpu. Is it correct?
    if you want to be completely safe from MDS, yes, that's correct.

    Leave a comment:


  • Xwaang
    replied
    Originally posted by hotaru View Post

    no, no one is working on that. it's not possible to properly mitigate MDS with SMT active.
    So if someone with a bugged Intel chip wants to be safe, he/she must disable smt (hyperthreading) until he/she changes its cpu. Is it correct?

    Leave a comment:


  • hotaru
    replied
    Originally posted by Xwaang View Post
    Is someone working on properly mitigate mds and l1tf even when smt is active?
    no, no one is working on that. it's not possible to properly mitigate MDS with SMT active.

    Leave a comment:


  • Xwaang
    replied
    I have a i7-6700hq laptop and at the moment I've disabled smt (hyperthreading) since it was vulnerable also with the latest archlinux kernel and intel-ucode updates.
    Is someone working on properly mitigate mds and l1tf even when smt is active?

    Leave a comment:


  • DarkFoss
    replied
    Originally posted by hotaru View Post

    Sandy Bridge is still significantly faster even with SMT disabled, but we still haven't seen any mitigation for SPOILER at all. that one is expected to have a huge performance impact, so the FX may still win in the end.
    Heh I was just having a bit of fun.
    I thought spoiler could only be fixed through hardware so no microcode patches will ever come to previous and current Intel cpus. Unless the next gen Intel Specter hardware mitigations also cover Spoiler to some degree your only protection will come through software changes, ie slowdowns for all (Amd,Arm no clue about Ibm).

    Leave a comment:


  • hotaru
    replied
    Originally posted by DarkFoss View Post
    I'd bet my trusty FX 8350 would fare well against Sandy/Ivy Bridge these days.
    Sandy Bridge is still significantly faster even with SMT disabled, but we still haven't seen any mitigation for SPOILER at all. that one is expected to have a huge performance impact, so the FX may still win in the end.

    Leave a comment:


  • DarkFoss
    replied
    I'd bet my trusty FX 8350 would fare well against Sandy/Ivy Bridge these days.

    Leave a comment:


  • Ropid
    replied
    Originally posted by flower View Post

    sadly this does nothing atm. from your link:
    I tried to research what this means and it seems those "upcoming patches" happened very shortly afterwards so things should work already, for example the x86 patch is this one here for 4.19:

    https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux...1b07478fa0163c

    Leave a comment:


  • F.Ultra
    replied
    Originally posted by xcom View Post

    Microcodes are updated automatically in Ubuntu LTS, right ? I don't have to manually install them.
    Yes, if you have installed the "intel-microcode" package, "amd64-microcode" for those of us that run AMD processors.

    Leave a comment:


  • DoMiNeLa10
    replied
    Originally posted by r_a_trip View Post

    From the looks of it, with this cascade of Intel vulnerabilities with performance costly mitigations flooding the landscape, it seems that the Bulldozer architecture wasn't as bad as it was painted back then. Then came Zen. Now Zen 2. Rising performance and far fewer holes in the silicon. Looks like AMD is a safe bet to get. Even if marginally slower, less chance of having your data out on the street.
    Considering the trend, I'd say it's a matter of time before Intel chips become slower if you decide to keep mitigations on.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X