this post was submitted on 12 Aug 2024
511 points (95.9% liked)

Selfhosted

40184 readers
725 users here now

A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don't control.

Rules:

  1. Be civil: we're here to support and learn from one another. Insults won't be tolerated. Flame wars are frowned upon.

  2. No spam posting.

  3. Posts have to be centered around self-hosting. There are other communities for discussing hardware or home computing. If it's not obvious why your post topic revolves around selfhosting, please include details to make it clear.

  4. Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or github here. Just post the link for folks to click.

  5. Submission headline should match the article title (don’t cherry-pick information from the title to fit your agenda).

  6. No trolling.

Resources:

Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Here we are - 3600 which was still under manufacture 2-3 years ago are not get patched. Shame on you AMD, if it is true.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] victorz@lemmy.world -1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (6 children)

What I meant was exactly that, which you corroborated as correct. You'd first have to already compromise these systems, in order to be able to exploit this vulnerability. That's as I understood it. It's that correct?

Gosh, it's not easy getting my point across here today, I'm sorry.

All I'm saying is that I don't think AMD is doing this to us, on purpose. I think it's just happened, and they're not handling it very well, even though it's somewhat understandable. At least to me. 🤷‍♂️

But then again, I have no reason to be attacked or have my system compromised, so my situation is better than others', perhaps.

[–] Grippler@feddit.dk 2 points 3 months ago (5 children)

I think what most people disagree with, is that the active choice from AMD to not fix a very fixable issue, is a choice they know leaves customers is a seriously bad position. This is something they choose to do to their customers, because they could just as well choose to help them.

[–] victorz@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago (4 children)

they could just as well choose to help them.

I think that's what I have a hard time believing. If they could "just as well" help, it is my belief that they also would. Because I don't think they're morons. I think they know this hurts their reputation. There has to be some obstacle, be it financial or lack of man power or... something. That is my belief.

Don't you (all) think that sounds more likely than them just leaving their customers in the dark for no other reason than not having to do work?

[–] Grippler@feddit.dk 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

Of course there's a financial reason, they've probably done a cost/benefit analysis and decided that it's financially better to screw over those customers than to spend money fixing it. But that's exactly the issue!

[–] victorz@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I mean... 🤷‍♂️ The analysis is made, decision made. I probably have an affected system but... What's the real risk for private end users? Should I really be so concerned?

[–] Grippler@feddit.dk 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Should you really be concerned about a system that can be physically ruined by malware? I would say definitely yes...

[–] victorz@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago

I haven't had malware on any of my computers for 20+ years. 🤷‍♂️ Ever since I stopped clicking on shitty links on shitty sites and downloading shitty files with unknown contents and such behavior. I don't think I'm worried. I'm not the target group for these kinds of attacks, I think.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)