4 ms·
What is more risky to you: Leaving known vulnerabilities such as spectre unpatched or the possibility of Intel adding a backdoor for some unknown purpose that w
by davexunit 3y ago
What is more risky to you: Leaving known vulnerabilities such as spectre unpatched or the possibility of Intel adding a backdoor for some unknown purpose that wasn't present in the shipped hardware?
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- fsflover 3y agoThe former is more risky from the security point of view. The latter is more risky from the freedom point of view. (And, while an FSF supporter, I choose to be more secure.)
- Fice 3y agoVulnerabilities such as spectre are only relevant if you run untrusted non-free software. Also these vulnerabilities show that sandboxing is not effective on current CPUs, and specific mitigations does not solve the problem in general.