News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Linus Torvalds: “Somebody is pushing complete garbage for... by alerighi on Monday January 22, 2018 @07:15AM (#16203800)
The problem is that every fix that you could think for Spectre reduces the performance of the CPU.

So not enabling this by default it's a good choice, Spectre is very difficult to exploit: so if you do critical things you enable the fix, if you use the computer for gaming, video rendering, and things where you don't care too much about security but you care about performance, you don't enable it.

Re:Linus Torvalds: “Somebody is pushing complete garbage for... by eeeficus on Monday January 22, 2018 @07:23AM (#16203839)
Why not the other way around? You have the fix enabled and if you don't know you get protected by default. If you really know better then you can disable the fix (via a special CPU instruction), because you know you're not running anything critical?
Re:Linus Torvalds: “Somebody is pushing complete garbage for... by draugadrotten on Monday January 22, 2018 @09:13AM (#16204424)
> you can disable the fix (via a special CPU instruction)

The CPU can not be allowed to disable the fix, because then that could be done by an attacker. Therefore the only more secure way is to move in the secure direction, from insecure to more secure.

Re:Linus Torvalds: “Somebody is pushing complete garbage for... by simias on Monday January 22, 2018 @09:49AM (#16204694)
Nonsense, just make it so that only privileged kernel code can modify this configuration. Tons of CPU configuration parameters already work that way, it's a non-issue.

If for some reason you even want to forbid even privileged code from modifying the config then add an other "lock" bit that forbids subsequent reconfiguration till the next reboot.

Re:Linus Torvalds: “Somebody is pushing complete garbage for... by nolok on Monday January 22, 2018 @09:56AM (#16204740)
Uh no, they would obviously make it so only kernel code can run that, like many other such settings.

And if an attacker can run code at the kernel level it's a non issue, as they're already on the other side of the airtight hatchway anyway [1]: they're in control of the computer and the memory.

[1]: https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/oldnewthing/20060508-22/?p=...

Re:Linus Torvalds: “Somebody is pushing complete garbage for... by IntelMiner on Monday January 22, 2018 @11:26AM (#16205575)
"Spectre is very difficult to exploit"

From what I've seen. There's been demonstrated attacks using Javascript in Chrome to dump the saved passwords from the browser using these bugs

If an attack is that easy to pull off, I don't think it's reasonable to make it an "opt in"

Re:Linus Torvalds: “Somebody is pushing complete garbage for... by syncsynchalt on Monday January 22, 2018 @04:05PM (#16207899)
Agreed, I keep hearing it's difficult yet user om2 on the webkit team says they were able to come up with multiple attacks internally in the webkit team once they'd heard about the trick [1].

Safari/webkit have since rolled out mitigations to prevent the attacks that they figured out but it puts the lie to the idea that Spectre is only a theoretical attack that we've yet to see an exploit for.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16104831

Re:Linus Torvalds: “Somebody is pushing complete garbage for... by JohnStrange on Monday January 22, 2018 @08:33AM (#16204175)
Insecure defaults are always bad. The other way round would be the right choice. Let users downgrade their security for performance, if they insist.