3 ms·
Nice thoughts but the vulnerabilities of Spectre and Meltdown do not directly threaten code which runs on the vulnerable CPU. Instead, the vulnerabilities allow
by DSingularity 9y ago
Nice thoughts but the vulnerabilities of Spectre and Meltdown do not directly threaten code which runs on the vulnerable CPU. Instead, the vulnerabilities allow malicious code running on the vulnerable CPUs to attack the system and other apps. A subtle difference, but makes the job to identify the applications which are not trustworthy and avoid running them on the performant but potentially vulnerable cores.
- egwor 9y agoIf every application were signed (like on the apple store), does that help reduce the risk here? If it were a game server then all apps run would presumably be provided by some official third party who could be relied upon to sign the binary. If it were all signed, then is the risk of the box becoming compromised fairly small and worst case, replacing the entire box (rebuild) if there were an issue could address problems quickly? [edit to make it clear that this is a question]
- lixtra 9y agoIf the application can run sufficient complex arbitrary code it is not safe. Example: Safari with JavaScript JIT compilation.
- bradleyjg 9y agoIt is my understanding that any sort of cloud setup would be completely out. Also, anything with a web-browser or other platform that runs third party code. But that still leaves an awful lot of servers that are under the control of a single company or individual and don't run any untrusted code (sandboxed or otherwise), doesn't it?