3 ms·

Since he was right to do so and also right about the underlying meltdown issue, perhaps deserves more than ridicule?

by GalacticDomin8r 8y ago

rhaps0dy 8y ago
Huh, in what way was Theo right about Meltdown? Did he predict it? (just curious)
- yawaramin 8y ago
  He predicted similar in 2007: https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-misc&m=118296441702631&w=2 https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-misc&m=118296441702631&w=2
  - jcranmer 8y ago
    That's not anywhere close to a prediction of Meltdown. Meltdown is a side-channel attack that can cross the user/kernel boundary. What Theo was predicting is that all chips are getting complex MMUs to the point that there are bugs in corner cases that could be exploited to create infiltration leaks. Side channel attacks aren't bugs, insofar as no one is really promising that you can't observe side channels.
    - yawaramin 8y ago
      But the observable out-of-order execution used by these chips that led to Meltdown is a bug. Proof: AMD chips aren't affected by it: > The Meltdown vulnerability primarily affects Intel microprocessors,[52] but some ARM microprocessors are also affected.[53] The vulnerability does not affect AMD microprocessors.[19][54][55][56] Intel has countered that the flaws affect all processors,[57] but AMD has denied this, saying "we believe AMD processors are not susceptible due to our use of privilege level protections within paging architecture".[58] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meltdown_(security_vulnerability) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meltdown_(security_vulnerabili...
sverige 8y ago
Focusing on correctness and security isn't as popular or sexy as having the latest and greatest bleeding edge superfast stuff, until that stuff breaks and leaves your data vulnerable. But that's unpleasant, so it's easier to deflect than it is to question whether your goals should be adjusted.

3 ms·

Since he was right to do so and also right about the underlying meltdown issue, perhaps deserves more than ridicule?

by GalacticDomin8r 8y ago

Since he was right to do so and also right about the underlying meltdown issue, perhaps deserves more than ridicule?

rhaps0dy 8y ago
Huh, in what way was Theo right about Meltdown? Did he predict it? (just curious)
- yawaramin 8y ago
  He predicted similar in 2007: https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-misc&m=118296441702631&w=2 https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-misc&m=118296441702631&w=2
  - jcranmer 8y ago
    That's not anywhere close to a prediction of Meltdown. Meltdown is a side-channel attack that can cross the user/kernel boundary. What Theo was predicting is that all chips are getting complex MMUs to the point that there are bugs in corner cases that could be exploited to create infiltration leaks. Side channel attacks aren't bugs, insofar as no one is really promising that you can't observe side channels.
    - yawaramin 8y ago
      But the observable out-of-order execution used by these chips that led to Meltdown is a bug. Proof: AMD chips aren't affected by it: > The Meltdown vulnerability primarily affects Intel microprocessors,[52] but some ARM microprocessors are also affected.[53] The vulnerability does not affect AMD microprocessors.[19][54][55][56] Intel has countered that the flaws affect all processors,[57] but AMD has denied this, saying "we believe AMD processors are not susceptible due to our use of privilege level protections within paging architecture".[58] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meltdown_(security_vulnerability) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meltdown_(security_vulnerabili...
sverige 8y ago
Focusing on correctness and security isn't as popular or sexy as having the latest and greatest bleeding edge superfast stuff, until that stuff breaks and leaves your data vulnerable. But that's unpleasant, so it's easier to deflect than it is to question whether your goals should be adjusted.