• Telorand@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    47
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    As pointed out elsewhere, the attack requires kernel-level access, and anyone with that access can do a lot of damage anyway.

    And the flaw can be fixed (there’s a fix out), it’s just that there’s no remediation once the flaw has been exploited.

    • sun_is_ra@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      4 months ago

      It also means no AMD server could be resold because there is no way to know if it was previously infected

    • mox@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      4 months ago

      anyone with that access can do a lot of damage anyway.

      it’s just that there’s no remediation once the flaw has been exploited.

      One of these things is not like the other.

        • FierySpectre@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          4 months ago

          It’s always been a thing that the only way to completely be safe after malware is yeeting the old system and getting a new one…

          And even then there have been actively exploited issues where the system gets re-infected when reloading the data from a backup. (My memory is a bit rusty on that one, but it was just data being restored, nothing that should install anything)

      • Telorand@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        They’re intrinsically linked, in fact. If you have kernel access, you can do any number of things, including but not limited to persistent rootkits. I agree that this bug is one step further, since it affects the processor itself, but if somebody has ring 0 access that shouldn’t, you already have problems.

      • Shdwdrgn
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        Read it again, in context. What they said is perfectly valid.

        • mox@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          No, it is misleading. An exploit with no remediation is not remotely comparable to a normal root exploit, which can be fixed with a simple OS reinstall.

          Edit: And their follow-up comment, “if somebody has ring 0 access that shouldn’t, you already have problems,” is dangerously misleading. While technically true that you would have a problem in both scenarios, presenting it that way is like telling someone not to worry about losing a leg because their sprained ankle is already a problem.