3 ms·

I think this is bad advice, yes there is a performance hit but chances are any eventual malware (which lets be honest if it doesn't already exist is being writt

I think this is bad advice, yes there is a performance hit but chances are any eventual malware (which lets be honest if it doesn't already exist is being written as we speak) that exploits these vulns will in its execution probably impact your system with a negative performance hit. The "don't apply the updates" argument in security is basically philosophically comparable to the antivax movement

dfrage 7y ago
> The "don't apply the updates" argument in security is basically philosophically comparable to the antivax movement As long as you also apply the quarantine principle when relevant. And herd immunity, both applied backwards: Quarantine for when you run code that's under your control, like an HPC cluster; the biggest dangers from these vulnerabilities are when you're running completely random code supplied by others, JavaScript in browsers for normal users, and the multi-tenant systems of cloud providers. Herd size matters because the bigger the herd, the larger the number of potentially vulnerable systems. IBM mainframe chips are vulnerable to Meltdown and Spectre, but there aren't hardly as many of them as x86 systems. Although the payoff of compromising them is likely to be disproportionately high.