3 ms·
I don’t think so. Side channel attacks became recently more mainstream and people start designing stuff with it in mind. What you see here is yet another attac
by legulere 7y ago
I don’t think so. Side channel attacks became recently more mainstream and people start designing stuff with it in mind.
What you see here is yet another attack on a relatively unused Intel-only x86 extension.
The bigger problem is that Unixes and Windows are pretty bad at sandboxing syscalls by default.
- baybal2 7y agoI do remember there 100% were academic papers throwing barbs into Pentium 3 branch predictor security back in nineties. They just went unnoticed for there being no Google logo on the paper. People in hardware engineering community knew of their existence long ago. It was just them not being practically exploitable that kept them from headlines. But now we have a multibillion buck virtualised hosting industry, and JS with JIT in every browser — a million buck incentive for black hats to poke into architectural vulnurabilities
- kbenson 7y ago> back in nineties. They just went unnoticed for there being no Google logo on the paper. Google wasn't nearly as big a deal back in the 90's (hell, they were only really around the last couple years of the decade) so that's a weird association to make.