Intel patches new ME vulnerabilities

Re:Intel patches new ME vulnerabilities by michaelmrose on Monday July 23, 2018 @02:37PM (#17594775)

Servers are "safely" operable until they die. The failure mode is that the machine stops operating. If your system has redundancy built in it keeps working possibly at reduced capacity. If not it stops. If its essential that service not be interrupted you build in redundancy and ensure that it fails in a safe way if it does.

I'm not sure where safety or insurance comes into this discussion at all.

People upgrade sooner because they stand to gain more than the upgrade costs not because its not safe to operate.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Intel patches new ME vulnerabilities by TomMarius on Tuesday July 24, 2018 @02:30AM (#17598591)

No, we literally upgrade because it's cheaper than the billions in damages.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Intel patches new ME vulnerabilities by michaelmrose on Tuesday July 24, 2018 @02:21PM (#17603681)

How would you incur billions in damages?

Your cpu is probably fit for 10-20 years of service. Every other part of your computer will fall down around it first.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Intel patches new ME vulnerabilities by CamperBob2 on Tuesday July 24, 2018 @06:56AM (#17599806)

Just curious, are you familiar with a concept in the quality/reliability field known as the "bathtub curve?"

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Intel patches new ME vulnerabilities by TomMarius on Tuesday July 24, 2018 @07:35AM (#17600036)

Yes. I guess that you're trying to point at us increasing the early failure rate, right? We're insured against that. We can't insure ourselves against the right part of the curve.

[ Parent | on HN ]