Re:Intel hit with 32 lawsuits over security flaws
by sundvor on Friday February 16, 2018 @08:27PM
(#16398263)
64 would seem like the logical next step!
Re:Intel hit with 32 lawsuits over security flaws
by sannee on Saturday February 17, 2018 @06:30AM
(#16400248)
Assume you build a product using TLS as the underlying encryption layer. Unfortunately, few months later, some bored mathematician figures out how to completely break AES and ECDH.
Should you be held accountable for choosing "weak" ciphers?
Re:Intel hit with 32 lawsuits over security flaws
by jnbiche on Saturday February 17, 2018 @08:30AM
(#16400574)
> Should you be held accountable for choosing "weak" ciphers?
That would be up to the jury. For something like your scenario, as long as you're keeping up and using industry best practices, you almost certainly would have nothing to worry about. In fact, a case like that would likely be dismissed immediately by the judge before it ever went to trial.
Re:Intel hit with 32 lawsuits over security flaws
by sannee on Saturday February 17, 2018 @11:27AM
(#16401339)
Okay then, let's assume you are doing something more cutting edge. Like speculative execution involving memory prefetching.
What are "industry best practices" for that? There are like 3 companies which do this competitively at scale and each of them guard their methods like it's the Coca-Cola recipe.
We need to hold companies even more accountable than what they already are. 32 lawsuits is not enough, more like 320!