210
Researchers discover potentially catastrophic exploit present in AMD chips for decades
(www.engadget.com)
this post was submitted on 10 Aug 2024
210 points (83.0% liked)
Technology
59381 readers
4205 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Except the AMD exploit requires ring 0 access and is almost irrelevant to most users, whereas the Intel issues are physically destroying people's computers. The scale of the issues are utterly incomparable.
I'm much more angry with whatever dipshit at AMD decided to revoke permission for ZLUDA, and that they haven't yet been fired.
ZLUDA was probably taken down to protect AMD from being sued by Nvidia.
https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/nvidia-bans-using-translation-layers-for-cuda-software-to-run-on-other-chips-new-restriction-apparently-targets-zluda-and-some-chinese-gpu-makers
Didn't the author confirm the takedown came from AMD and not NVidia? AMD isn't responsible for third party software running on their hardware.
Although, IIRC they either sanctioned it or provided some initial funding, which might have put them in a more culpable position. Still, I'm pretty sure the takedown came from AMD, and it doesn't make sense that they're doing NVidia's policing for then.
They were paying for its development for about a year and a half.
Yeah, that'd do it. Although, again, it looks like the restriction wasn't in the NVIDIA licensing wording until recently. IANAL, but you it both parties are required to agree to contract changes; if AMD's contributions were all pre-wording change, they merely need to dust their hands; it's OSS. Why are they doing NVIDIA's dirty work for them?
I'm not convinced.