4 ms·

Everyone who does speculative execution had Spectre issues, but Meltdown-style vulnerabilities have been mostly Intel-exclusive. These new ones are too.

• dfrage 7y ago
  Maybe because Intel has shipped a thousand more SKUs and millions more CPUs with Meltdown than ARM, for which the Cortex-A75 was a new design, and IBM, which doesn't ship huge numbers of either POWER or mainframe CPUs??
  • ric2b 7y ago
    Why would that make a difference? We're not talking about manufacturing defects, every single unit they sell has the problem, doesn't matter if they sell 10 or 10 million.
    • dfrage 7y ago
      It makes a difference because Intel is a more attractive and more consequential target for researchers. AMD's market share in servers is minuscule and even declining a bit as of 19Q1 (?), and modest but increasing nicely in notebooks and desktops https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19916279 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19916279, while IBM's POWER and mainframe systems are expensive to very expensive to access. ARM is actually a good target with a number of their newest designs using out-of-order speculative execution with Spectre vulnerabilities and their owning mobile space outside of notebooks, one of the newest even being vulnerable to Meltdown, but the significant headline worthy instances tend to come in much more locked down devices. Speed is also an issue, everything else being equal, the faster the chip, the faster data exfiltration proofs of concept will work.