this post was submitted on 20 Aug 2024
64 points (100.0% liked)
Technology
58009 readers
3055 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
e.g. https://www.yahoo.com/tech/ryzen-3000-fix-sinkclose-vulnerability-183025768.html AMD has these sorts of flaws too, I don't know enough to tell if AMD is significantly better at this when deciding to buy
That AMD security vulnerability doesn't physically damage the CPU while this Intel flaw does. Thats a drastic difference so the two are not the same
So far the AMD security flaws aren't causing physical CPU damage, so Intel definitely wins the screw up award.
That exploit required kernel access to begin with, which at that point, you have much bigger problems.
Unfortunately, this problem is larger than a micro-code update. The main issue the user is likely referring to is Intel shipping defective product (oxidation issues), denying warranty claims for said defective product, then staying quiet when it's proven they have been shipping defective product. Intel could have owned up to the issue and proactively recalled defective units, but, they didn't do the honorable thing, not even close.