From owner-freebsd-security@freebsd.org Thu Jan 4 02:14:29 2018 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-security@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A22C7EBE8F5 for ; Thu, 4 Jan 2018 02:14:29 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from brett@lariat.org) Received: from mail.lariat.net (mail.lariat.net [66.62.230.51]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7504E735A9 for ; Thu, 4 Jan 2018 02:14:28 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from brett@lariat.org) Received: from Toshi.lariat.org (IDENT:ppp1000.lariat.net@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.lariat.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id TAA09989 for ; Wed, 3 Jan 2018 19:14:25 -0700 (MST) Message-Id: <201801040214.TAA09989@mail.lariat.net> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.1.0.9 Date: Wed, 03 Jan 2018 19:13:56 -0700 To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org From: Brett Glass Subject: Re: Intel hardware bug Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-BeenThere: freebsd-security@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.25 Precedence: list List-Id: "Security issues \[members-only posting\]" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 04 Jan 2018 02:14:29 -0000 It's a huge fail. One can apparently use speculative execution to create memory leaks. Some Intel processors without speculative execution - such as the Atom CPUs (including the embedded ones) - won't be affected, whereas the bigger, fancier i3, i5, i7, and Xeon processors will. It's unclear on which side of the line the Atom C2000 series (which had out-of-order but not speculative execution) will lie. Hopefully, when FreeBSD develops kernel patches to address the bug, it will exempt the unaffected processors. (I do a lot of work for embedded Atoms, and hope that they will not be slowed by patches intended for CPUs that actually need them.) --Brett Glass At 06:56 PM 1/2/2018, Joey Kelly wrote: >On Tuesday, January 02, 2018 08:52:27 PM Mike Tancsa wrote: > > I am guessing this will impact FreeBSD as well ? > > > > http://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/01/02/intel_cpu_design_flaw/ > >No way around it. It's hardware FAIL, and ignoring it isn't an option since >it's apparently a huge hole. > >-- >Joey Kelly >Minister of the Gospel and Linux Consultant >http://joeykelly.net >504-239-6550 >_______________________________________________ >freebsd-security@freebsd.org mailing list >https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-security >To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-security-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"