Microsoft Resumes Meltdown and Spectre Updates for AMD Devices (bleepingcomputer.com) 49
Microsoft has resumed the rollout of security updates for AMD devices. The updates patch the Meltdown and Spectre vulnerabilities. From a report: Microsoft released these patches on January 3, but the company stopped the rollout for AMD-based computers on January 9 after users reported crashes that plunged PCs into unbootable states. After working on smoothing out the problems with AMD, Microsoft announced today it would resume the rollout of five (out of nine) security updates.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:but why (Score:4, Insightful)
So is the title flamebait, as is usual for our new Slashdot overlords?
Re: (Score:2)
So is the title flamebait, as is usual for our new Slashdot overlords?
Not just Slashdot. From TFA, on Bleeping Computer: Microsoft has resumed the rollout of security updates for AMD devices. The updates patch the Meltdown and Spectre vulnerabilities.
Then, later in TFA: The Meltdown flaw does not affect AMD devices, but these updates include an OS-level patch for the Spectre flaw.
Proofreading is apparently becoming, or already has become, a lost art.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Spectre is pretty much anything with a modern chip, including Intel, AMD, and ARM. Some of the few exemptions were processors that don't do speculative/out-of-order execution. The only more recent hardware I've seen that's immune are the Raspberry Pi (in-order-execution) and some ARM hardware such as various Snapdragon or Cortex-A53/55. Some of the older Atom stuff is also safe because it doesn't do OOE, but Spectre will hit the majority of the rest.
Meltdown was quite certainly an Intel thing according all
Re: (Score:1)
the company stopped the rollout for AMD-based computers on January 9 after users reported crashes that plunged PCs into unbootable states.
One (of many) reasons why forced updates are a bad idea. Time to go back to Windows 7, which doesn't have forced updates, until Microsoft/AMD get their shit together and can issue patches that don't fuck up your computer.
Re: (Score:2)
But how are they going to test their patches for their paying customers without the guinea pigs that don't have the money to sue?
Re: (Score:2)
Most of us define a modern chip as one with a modern processor (processors) and modern is generally one with out of order execution.
The main advantage of OoO execution is enabling speculation where instructions that can't be guaranteed to be executed in the future _but_ are likely to be are allowed to begin execution.
This means things that would stall (=halt execution) a processor with no speculation can be bypassed which greatly increases the performance of the design, if the instruction is later detected
Re: (Score:2)
Comment removed (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
So you are perfectly content with fearing when the next manual update will brick your computer. Perfectly reasonable.
As for updates just happening forcefully while working, that hasn't been true for a very long time, unless you keep delaying the update for weeks AND you are working outside of your normal work hours (or you haven't set windows update to not update during those hours).
Re: (Score:1)
>So you are perfectly content with fearing when the next manual update will brick your computer. Perfectly reasonable.
Yes. I have backups and saved all my work. With automatic updates, not so much.
Re: (Score:2)
Having an update screw your machine is always concerning.
Doing it manually means that you get to chose when.
Normal working hours....
While working...
I left my machine running a application that I knew would run a long time, and who's result I really needed the next day.
I foolishly had not yet turned off automatic updates. I am sure you see where this is going, the machine updated and rebooted and killed by app.
For me, normal working hours is not a concept.
If it works for you, awesome, but it does not work f
Re: (Score:2)
So... If you manually update then you won't get any emergency calls that you have to fix right now. That's interesting.
Nothing wrong really with wanting to control the when updates apply, but saying it's because you are afraid that you might get a call while the update is happening isn't a valid reason.
Also, Windows Pro has all the options to delay, postpone, not install during specific hours, and not while you are using the computer. Or are you saying that you are using Window Home and you'd need to pay
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, I might get a call right after my update gets to the uninterruptible part, after I chose to start it.
An aside, the mocking, irritating way of trying to make a point wont win you points. It is the opposite of persuasive.
Back to the point.
It is a valid reason, I got to chose the time based on my assessment of the availability of other machines, my staff members, the probability of a call, and other factors as they relate. Also, I am unlikely to decide to interrupt a long running, important running task
Re: (Score:2)
Yes. Windows 10 Pro has the following options for managing updates:
Change active hours -> You can select 18 hours per day in which updates will not happen.
Restart Options (different from applying the update, this affects when it will restart the machine to finish applying the update if it needs to) -> Schedule time pick any time in the next x days (set in advanced options) in which the PC will restart to apply the update if you don't manually restart before then.
Restart Options -> Show more notifi
Re: (Score:2)
That is pretty comprehensive.
It sounds like they are all "pre" settings, where I would have to choose beforehand to delay updates a set amount.
I am partial to the Windows 7 method, it tells me there are updates available and downloaded.
If the coast is clear, I start the update. If not, it reminds me, and I take care of them when convenient to me.
It requires diligence on my part, I have to make sure to set the time aside, and not let them sit too long.
Thank you,
Re: (Score:2)
Dude entirely too complex. How to explain it to the anal idiots at M$. Manual update, I do one machine if it works, I do the next machine and if it doesn't well that fucking sucks and M$ are a pack of arsehole fuck knuckle cunts and various other bits of swearing as I try to fix the machine, yes the swearing really does happen. Automatic updates, all my machines are broken, fuck you to hell M$, no more fucking windows and hello Linux. I had M$ as a server once, it was fucking shit, I switched to a Linux ser
Re: (Score:2)
Another point I had meant to make on the manual updates.
If you allow Microsoft to schedule it, you could have your whole department/office/ set of machines bricked in one swell foop.
If you do them manually, you can
A, wait a few days, see if any of the bright eye'd and bushy tailed "gonna do it, gotta have it" group have blazed that trail and reported ( or not ) problems
( kinda like with this update set ). ( and yes, you need to assess the risk, if n
Re: Thank God automatic updates can be turned off (Score:2)
What about the children? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
What should they do? These machines are already in a stable state.
Re: (Score:2)
But fulfilling two of the three qualities of the CIA triad. If this was politics, I'd win!
Since Spectre doesn't actually needs to be patched (Score:2)
all you who have an AMD CPU can just relax.
Let me repeat: spectre doesn't need patching - it cannot be practically used for exploits.
Re: (Score:2)
Would you bet your money on that claim? It would not be the first "oh that cannot possibly be exploited in a real life scenario" bug that turned into a nightmare when someone with lots of creativity and criminal energy went to work.
Re: Since Spectre doesn't actually needs to be pat (Score:2)
Re:Since Spectre doesn't actually needs to be patc (Score:5, Insightful)
The 2 Specter variants are just theoretical. It is just Intel FUD.To distract he public from what a nightmare Meltdown truly is to Intel.
Re: (Score:2)
My understanding is that AMD is theroretically vulnerable to hard to mitigate spectre (version 2?), But the proof of concept didn't work on it and AMD says it's super improbable. Certainly that warrents mitigation though.
Other Spectre easy to fix is easy to fix (version 1?).
And AMD is immune to meltdown.
Please correct me where I'm wrong, there's a lot of FUD and also a lot of super "AMD is immune" nonsense.
As it is, there is no proof of concept for hard to fix spectre on AMD.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
There's nothing theoretical about it. All three bugs had working proof of concepts published on the day of release.
Re: (Score:2)
I am in fact doing that. You know why? Because I can read, and I use that ability to collect information. For instance, I collected information about Spectre.
Try it sometimes.