Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2018 10:18:08 -0500 From: Eric McCorkle <eric@metricspace.net> To: =?UTF-8?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=c3=b8rgrav?= <des@des.no> Cc: freebsd-security@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Intel hardware bug Message-ID: <867801a5-be19-8f62-fa46-2999d54c0967@metricspace.net> In-Reply-To: <86zi5tu1a2.fsf@desk.des.no> References: <19097.1515012519@segfault.tristatelogic.com> <02563ce4-437c-ab96-54bb-a8b591900ba0@FreeBSD.org> <7C58A6DB-0760-4E5A-B65D-2ED6A6B7AAD2@acsalaska.net> <867esy2vwz.fsf@desk.des.no> <0bb7ffc6-fa51-98db-9dc1-1bd49e1c7b44@metricspace.net> <86zi5tu1a2.fsf@desk.des.no>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 01/04/2018 09:49, Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote: > Eric McCorkle <eric@metricspace.net> writes: >> Given enough skill, resources, and motivation, it's likely that an >> attacker could craft a javascript-based version of the attack, then >> every javascript website (aka all of them) is a potential attack vector. > > Uh, this has already been demonstrated. According to Google, Chrome 64 > (to be released in a few days) includes countermeasures against it. I > don't have any further details. This does not surprise me at all.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?867801a5-be19-8f62-fa46-2999d54c0967>