friendica.eskimo.com

captainkangaroo via Linux lemmy (AP)

Intel Linux Patch Would Report Outdated CPU Microcode As A Security Vulnerability

119 2 1
Nanook friendica
Microcode would not be a concern with that particular CPU.
18 1 1
ryannathans lemmy (AP)
How does it know if the microcode is outdated?
4 1
Nanook friendica
@ryannathans @captainkangaroo I'm going to make the wild assumption that the kernel will have a table of the current microcode versions at the time of it's release, but I doubt that
will get updated except by kernel upgrades.
14 1
Strit lemmy (AP)
There's probably an efivar that reads the current microcode version.
2 1
DaPorkchop_ lemmy (AP)
Debian-based distros (and probably most othera as well) actually have a package called "intel-microcode" which gets updated fairly regularly.
2
Nanook friendica
@DaPorkchop_ Oddly, if you build your own kernel and remove the system provided one, the package gets automatically removed as well which is weird, because it is really still needed regardless.
1
ryannathans lemmy (AP)
If that's the case, why wouldn't they put the microcode in the kernel?
1
Nanook friendica
@ryannathans Why bloat the kernel with the microcode for every intel processor that might need it (and there is a similar thing for AMD) when you don't have that specific processor? It does make more sense for it to be a separate, especially on memory constrained systems. I mean if you've got 256GB of RAM probably not a big deal but if you've got 256MB a big deal.
1
ryannathans lemmy (AP)

The kernel compilation is already configurable between megabytes and gigabyte+

Distros pick their featureset

This entry was edited (22 hours ago)
1
The real thing is: can you update the microcode of older CPUs? If not then it's a marketing strategy.
28 3 1
undefined lemmy (AP)
I mean, it’s still good to know if you’re vulnerable right (for sake of discussion)?
This entry was edited (1 day ago)
20 1
Nanook friendica
@GolfNovemberUniform @captainkangaroo Yes and Linux includes software to do this.
9 1
IrritableOcelot lemmy (AP)
The article does specify that it would report if the newest version of the firmware for the CPU family is not installed, so it doesn't seem like this is that particular kind of BS.
5 1
stuner lemmy (AP)
It sounds like the criterion is "is newer microcode available". So it doesn't look like a marketing strategy to sell new CPUs.
13 1
ouch lemmy (AP)
The Linux kernel would maintain a list of the latest Intel microcode versions for each CPU family, which is based on the data from the Intel microcode GitHub repository. In turn this list would need to be kept updated with new Linux kernel releases and as Intel pushes out new CPU microcode files.


Sounds like that would be outdated for everyone without a rolling distro.

4 3 1
Atemu lemmy (AP)
Stable distros can and will backport security fixes. Good ones that is.
10 1
AndrewZabar lemmy (AP)
Yeah, methinks this will be one of those alerts pretty much everyone will be like "yeah, yeah, I know" and click to silence those notifications.
1 1
trolololol lemmy (AP)
Sounds like a user space application, there's no place for this in the kernel. So would you need to upgrade kennel and reboot to update the list? Nonsense.
This entry was edited (2 hours ago)
1
electricprism lemmy (AP)

How about a Linux Patch that reports binary blobs wirh no source AS __ Security Vulnerabilities __

Or are we not allowed to criticize the back doors that hackers gain access to.

7 1 1
mvirts lemmy (AP)
So the patch is just copying the existing warning to a standard location?
1 1

This website uses cookies. If you continue browsing this website, you agree to the usage of cookies.