3 ms·
The x86 ISA and its implementations are now in the spotlight of the whole security research community. There is probably a lot more to come since it accumulated
by ysleepy 8y ago
The x86 ISA and its implementations are now in the spotlight of the whole security research community. There is probably a lot more to come since it accumulated a lot of cruft in the name of backwards compatibility.
I hope we learn a lot, and take the time to record the experience, for coming platforms like RISC-V and others.
Why is there no big CAVEATs document from intel detailing weird quirks. I strongly assume the intel arch engineers are well aware of many of those counter-intuitive behaviours in their products.
- adrianratnapala 8y ago> I strongly assume the intel arch engineers are well aware of many of those counter-intuitive behaviours in their products. But it is likely just kind of distributed, organic knowledge that is hard to condense into a single document. Writing and maintaining such a thing would be a significant project, and (I am speculating here) not the kind of thing that significantly burnishes anyone's performance review. That said, the whole community of assembly-hackers has even broader knowledge of the topic, and could start such a document out in the open. And Intel engineers might likely contribute their own two cents. (Unless lawyers forbid it).
- ysleepy 8y agoI stumbled on a blogpost by bunnie huang which describes a liability angle, which I found to be plausible: https://www.bunniestudios.com/blog/?p=5127 https://www.bunniestudios.com/blog/?p=5127 - worth a read.