Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by Fnord666 on Wednesday April 04 2018, @08:46AM   Printer-friendly
from the defect-closed-will-not-fix dept.

It seems Intel has had some second thoughts about Spectre 2 microcode fixes:

Intel has issued new a new "microcode revision guidance" that confesses it won't address the Meltdown and Spectre design flaws in all of its vulnerable processors – in some cases because it's too tricky to remove the Spectre v2 class of vulnerabilities.

The new guidance (pdf), issued April 2, adds a "stopped" status to Intel's "production status" category in its array of available Meltdown and Spectre security updates. "Stopped" indicates there will be no microcode patch to kill off Meltdown and Spectre.

The guidance explains that a chipset earns "stopped" status because, "after a comprehensive investigation of the microarchitectures and microcode capabilities for these products, Intel has determined to not release microcode updates for these products for one or more reasons."

Those reasons are given as:

  • Micro-architectural characteristics that preclude a practical implementation of features mitigating [Spectre] Variant 2 (CVE-2017-5715)
  • Limited Commercially Available System Software support
  • Based on customer inputs, most of these products are implemented as "closed systems" and therefore are expected to have a lower likelihood of exposure to these vulnerabilities.

Thus, if a chip family falls under one of those categories – such as Intel can't easily fix Spectre v2 in the design, or customers don't think the hardware will be exploited – it gets a "stopped" sticker. To leverage the vulnerabilities, malware needs to be running on a system, so if the computer is totally closed off from the outside world, administrators may feel it's not worth the hassle applying messy microcode, operating system, or application updates.

"Stopped" CPUs that won't therefore get a fix are in the Bloomfield, Bloomfield Xeon, Clarksfield, Gulftown, Harpertown Xeon C0 and E0, Jasper Forest, Penryn/QC, SoFIA 3GR, Wolfdale, Wolfdale Xeon, Yorkfield, and Yorkfield Xeon families. The list includes various Xeons, Core CPUs, Pentiums, Celerons, and Atoms – just about everything Intel makes.

Most [of] the CPUs listed above are oldies that went on sale between 2007 and 2011, so it is likely few remain in normal use.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 4, Informative) by bzipitidoo on Wednesday April 04 2018, @01:21PM (2 children)

    by bzipitidoo (4388) on Wednesday April 04 2018, @01:21PM (#662462) Journal

    It's an inherent flaw with the dirty way speculative execution was implemented, which goes all the way back to the Pentium Pro in the mid '90s, and also affects AMD, ARM-- any company that employed speculative execution in their architecture and couldn't resist skipping a few checks to save time, which I think was just about all of them. If you want an Intel chip that is unaffected by Spectre, have to go all the way back to the Pentium. One thing the first Pentiums became infamous for was that division bug, but it shouldn't be too hard to avoid those. Sometimes, manufacturers buy older architectures, and chip makers helpfully produce them on the smaller processes available today. For instance, in recent times you could get a 100 MHz 486. I have no idea whether there are any new Pentiums available in, say, a 32nm process, and which can run at 1GHz, but there could be such a thing.

    I can tell you that a 133 MHz Pentium MMX system with 96M of RAM (the max that system can support) is excruciatingly, painfully slow with modern software. The last time I fooled with that platform, I tried to run Firefox 3.5 on it. It worked, but it took 30 seconds just to start up with a blank page. On that machine, Stellarium took 5 minutes to start, and was so slow it was unusable. 96M just isn't enough RAM any more, need at least 512M.

    Intel isn't planning to fix this problem immediately. May have to wait for the Tigerlake arch, perhaps in 2020. AMD chips are subject to less of the vulnerabilities, but aren't immune to all of them. Don't know what AMD is doing about it, whether they will have it all fixed before Intel, but it seems likely they will. There just isn't a good option right now. Wait a year or two, or use an ancient Pentium system, or live with it.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +2  
       Informative=2, Total=2
    Extra 'Informative' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   4  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 05 2018, @08:42AM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 05 2018, @08:42AM (#662830)

    Sounds like a good time to not buy new computers.

    • (Score: 2) by bzipitidoo on Thursday April 05 2018, @12:37PM

      by bzipitidoo (4388) on Thursday April 05 2018, @12:37PM (#662890) Journal

      Tell me about it. I had been waiting to upgrade my 2 old circa 2007 desktop systems. Decided to stop waiting last summer. Also, the power supply on one of them was failing and making the system unreliable, prone to spontaneous reboots and freezes. I wanted the Ryzen, but it would have been another half a year wait at least, so I went ahead and got a Skylake and then a Kaby Lake. The shine still hadn't worn off when the news about Meltdown and Spectre hit.

      So then I checked that the old desktop's problem really was a bad power supply, bought and installed a new one, and it's working fine again.