News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:AMD PSB Vendor Locks EPYC CPUs for Enhanced Security at a... by justinclift on Tuesday September 08, 2020 @11:47PM (#24416861)
If I put a cpu in a server (Dell, HP, whatever), and that CPU then doesn't function in other equipment, than that cpu is broken. That's not an exaggeration in any way.

So, the server maker then owes me a new cpu (of the same model obviously) that does work.

It'll be interesting to see the legal fallout from this, as purposely breaking customer owned gear is not going to end well.

Re:AMD PSB Vendor Locks EPYC CPUs for Enhanced Security at a... by snuxoll on Tuesday September 08, 2020 @11:58PM (#24416938)
While shitty, if this required pre-programmed OEM CPU’s it would be one thing - but knowing I could put a several thousand dollar boxed CPU into a branded motherboard and have it perpetually locked to that OEM is horrible.

Quite frankly this should be an optional security feature I can flip off with a physical switch on the board - go show an alert on the BMC for all I care, but as is this is total bullshit.

Re:AMD PSB Vendor Locks EPYC CPUs for Enhanced Security at a... by ColanR on Wednesday September 09, 2020 @09:49AM (#24420940)
> It'll be interesting to see the legal fallout from this, as purposely breaking customer owned gear is not going to end well.

IANAL; I wonder if this would be grounds for a class-action lawsuit in the future. Something like suing the motherboard manufacturers to replace every CPU their boards have broken by this method.

Re:AMD PSB Vendor Locks EPYC CPUs for Enhanced Security at a... by throwaway2048 on Wednesday September 09, 2020 @02:59AM (#24418091)
Good luck collecting on the new CPU they owe you
Re:AMD PSB Vendor Locks EPYC CPUs for Enhanced Security at a... by dayjobpork on Wednesday September 09, 2020 @08:30AM (#24420261)
Australian Consumer Law would make Dell liable for damages if anyone bought a computer from them that damaged a CPU by design. I don't even think that having a warning attached would be a sufficient shield, because it's impossible to 100% guarantee that an end user fully comprehends the consequences of a computer that is designed to permanently alter how their CPU functions.
Re:AMD PSB Vendor Locks EPYC CPUs for Enhanced Security at a... by TwoBit on Wednesday September 09, 2020 @02:17AM (#24417807)
AMD created this feature, so why not complain to them?
Re:AMD PSB Vendor Locks EPYC CPUs for Enhanced Security at a... by jacoblambda on Wednesday September 09, 2020 @03:15AM (#24418209)
While reaching out directly to the company is definitely a strong way to express disagreement, I almost guarantee that someone from AMD PR will be reading through comments on tech community posts like these.

Expressing discontent in an open forum can catalyse a much larger reaction that PR depts will pay much more attention to compared to a few angry emails or twitter DMs.

Re:AMD PSB Vendor Locks EPYC CPUs for Enhanced Security at a... by alisonkisk on Wednesday September 09, 2020 @02:43AM (#24417980)
No one owes you anything if the CPU functions exactly as advertised.

If you don't want a platform-secured CPU, don't buy one.

Re:AMD PSB Vendor Locks EPYC CPUs for Enhanced Security at a... by erik_seaberg on Wednesday September 09, 2020 @02:52AM (#24418034)
Nobody advertises irreparable damage. This testing lab found out the hard way and then had to follow up with the vendors to get an explanation.
Re:AMD PSB Vendor Locks EPYC CPUs for Enhanced Security at a... by dastx on Wednesday September 09, 2020 @04:45AM (#24418811)
This entirely depends on individual's perspective.

As Chris mentioned, this is exactly what Big Corp™ wants. They'll be the ones buying it too, and would likely pay extra for such a feature. They're the target market for these vendors.

Thus, sure, for those looking to buy second hand, this is indeed advertising irreparable damage. But for Big Corp™, this is advertising security (in my opinion quite rightly so), and ensuring their data isn't stolen.

Re:AMD PSB Vendor Locks EPYC CPUs for Enhanced Security at a... by dayjobpork on Wednesday September 09, 2020 @08:32AM (#24420271)
And what happens when old hardware is resold? How can anyone trust any future excorp hardware?
Re:AMD PSB Vendor Locks EPYC CPUs for Enhanced Security at a... by dastx on Wednesday September 09, 2020 @03:08PM (#24424605)
Well you don't. But corportations don't really care about that as much as they care about their data.

Admittedly it feels like AMD could have created something that allows the chip to be reset providing you have the original signing keys.

Re:AMD PSB Vendor Locks EPYC CPUs for Enhanced Security at a... by erik_seaberg on Wednesday September 09, 2020 @10:21PM (#24428294)
They should at least disclose to all prospective buyers that a current chip cannot be reset, and how to tell which firmware CA it's stuck on.
Re:AMD PSB Vendor Locks EPYC CPUs for Enhanced Security at a... by Dylan16807 on Wednesday September 09, 2020 @03:08AM (#24418151)
> If you don't want a platform-secured CPU, don't buy one.

...the problem is what happens when you buy an unlocked CPU.

Re:AMD PSB Vendor Locks EPYC CPUs for Enhanced Security at a... by argb on Wednesday September 09, 2020 @10:25AM (#24421317)
It becomes a problem when there's a monopoly or a duopoly of suppliers and there are no suitable alternatives on the market with similar performance characteristics. I believe then the FTC can get involved with antitrust matters if they are abusing their dominant position to prevent reuse/recycling.
Re:AMD PSB Vendor Locks EPYC CPUs for Enhanced Security at a... by anon73044 on Wednesday September 09, 2020 @10:43AM (#24421554)
AMD has barely 10% server market share, if anything that just shows that Intel is the monopoly.