[UPDATE] Intel gets multiple class action lawsuits over CPU vulnerability

[Derangel]

If they can prove that Intel knew about this for the past decade (since it effects CPU that far back) then there might be a case to be made, however Intel was only informed in June.

[Curufinwe_wins]

5 minutes ago, Zodiark1593 said:

I also read a story about the Van Allen Belts and America detonating a nuclear device among them back in the 1960s. Because messing with what we only just discovered, and could potentially impact all of life, is a great idea.

It didn't have any chance of impacting all life. Or even a small proportion of life even in LNT cases... but certainly it was a strong observation of the EM effects of such tests. At least it was done in the 60s when we didn't actually rely much on satellites compared to today. 

 

[I'm a NE by profession and education.]

[TimeOmnivore]

8 minutes ago, mr moose said:

I know this is going to sound awful, but the reality is that a lot of the rest of the world just shakes their head at the state of the USA at the moment.  There are pockets of supporters here and there, but for the most part the universal response is disbelief.  

As someone who lives in the USA, a good amount of us here also seem to be in that same state of disbelief. It's seriously gotten pretty damn ridiculous here and is, in no small amount, terrifying.

[Eduard the weeb]

seeing how apple is being sued this is no surprise to me

[Mira Yurizaki]

24 minutes ago, mr moose said:

I know this is going to sound awful, but the reality is that a lot of the rest of the world just shakes their head at the state of the USA at the moment.  There are pockets of supporters here and there, but for the most part the universal response is disbelief.  

And that's fine by me.

 

The world needs a new "leader".

[Froody129]

Omf people...

 

Intel doesn’t claim x performance in y benchmark because they’re not stupid. They’ll show graphs where this CPU performed x perfect better than last gen under their own test results with a massive disclaimer saying your results may be different 

 

We bought the CPU at x clockspeed at y architecture and that’s what we have. Intel doesn’t guarantee performance and if they didn’t know about the security flaw they couldn’t have done anything about it. 

 

I really dont see this case going anywhere...

[Mira Yurizaki]

9 minutes ago, Froody129 said:

Omf people...

 

Intel doesn’t claim x performance in y benchmark because they’re not stupid. They’ll show graphs where this CPU performed x perfect better than last gen under their own test results with a massive disclaimer saying your results may be different 

 

We bought the CPU at x clockspeed at y architecture and that’s what we have. Intel doesn’t guarantee performance and if they didn’t know about the security flaw they couldn’t have done anything about it. 

 

I really dont see this case going anywhere...

Where there's angry people and corporations, there's lawyers.

[D13H4RD]

Welp, a lawsuit was going to happen, even if it's for a reason that makes little sense. 

[RefresherMan]

How is this fraud when it's a bug? Am I missing something here?

[Guest]

2 hours ago, Drak3 said:

'Murica, where you can sue for everything without understanding anything.

The whole world is run on bullshit im sure of it.

[Matu20]

Cool, more reasons to boycott them.

[Arika]

2 minutes ago, Matu20 said:

Cool, more reasons to boycott them.

who? Garcia?

[DrMacintosh]

-AMD shareholders 

[IntMD]

2 hours ago, RefresherMan said:

How is this fraud when it's a bug? Am I missing something here?

My take on it would be they knowingly released 'new' processors with the same problem, after Intel had been told of the problem and had time to investigate it, and without disclosing to those buying it that they may have a performance hit from this being fixed.

 

I know why they didn't tell anyone at the time, but that is still a somewhat shitty thing to do. I can understand why those people who bought a new processor after Intel were advised and had time to investigate could be pissed off by that.

 

(Tinfoil hat time) I can imagine some people wondering if at least a small part of why coffeelake ended up being brought forward by a few months was to get it released before this became public knowledge.

[jagdtigger]

13 minutes ago, IntMD said:

(Tinfoil hat time)

Wanna bet that intel known about it even earlier? I just cant believe that a huge pile of top notch engineers overlook a serious flaw for 20 years straight...

[Bit_Guardian]

10 minutes ago, jagdtigger said:

Wanna bet that intel known about it even earlier? I just cant believe that a huge pile of top notch engineers overlook a serious flaw for 20 years straight...

Hey, look at how many people maintain Linux, and Torvalds' own bad code responsible for Dirty COW had been in production for 6 years.

 

Brilliant people only have to trust each other and miss one tiny detail for things like this to happen.

[mr moose]

25 minutes ago, Bit_Guardian said:

Hey, look at how many people maintain Linux, and Torvalds' own bad code responsible for Dirty COW had been in production for 6 years.

 

Brilliant people only have to trust each other and miss one tiny detail for things like this to happen.

It's not just brilliant people, it's all people and the nature of the beast.    You can't fix a mistake you don't know exists no matter how smart you are.  We just have to look at the errata on any CPU to see how many issues get overlooked during design and testing.  And they are just the issues that get picked up because something failed to work the way it should.    It's anyone's guess how many bugs of equivalent size still exist. 

 

It's really quite sad how quick people are to assume the engineers should have picked this up, upon what rational is that kind of assumption based? 

 

 

[Bit_Guardian]

Just now, mr moose said:

It's not just brilliant people, it's all people and the nature of the beast.    You can't fix a mistake you don't know exists no matter how smart you are.  We just have to look at the errata on any CPU to see how many issues get overlooked during design and testing.  And they are just the issues that get picked up because something failed to work the way it should.    It's anyone's guess how many bugs of equivalent size still exist. 

 

It's really quite sad how quick people are to assume the engineers should have picked this up, upon what rational is that kind of assumption based? 

 

 

Well, you could by mistake. It's happened to me before during code reviews.

[mr moose]

Just now, Bit_Guardian said:

Well, you could by mistake. It's happened to me before during code reviews.

I would like to get stand up maths to do an episode on the number of bugs any one CPU is likely to have and the odds of the engineers both discovering and.or fixing by accident any one bug.

 

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCSju5G2aFaWMqn-_0YBtq5A

 

 

[TheOriginalHero]

Really dont see how intel or other cpu manufactuerers could be blamed for this if its taken this long for the exploit to be discovered

[mr moose]

3 minutes ago, TheOriginalHero said:

Really dont see how intel or other cpu manufactuerers could be blamed for this if its taken this long for the exploit to be discovered

Some people think manufacturers are infallible and thus when something goes wrong it must be intentional.

[Princess Luna]

6 hours ago, Drak3 said:

'Murica, where you can sue for everything without understanding anything.

Hey people sued God, Jesus and the Moon there just to prove a point about their justice system, either ways this lawsuit is obviously going no where.

[Bit_Guardian]

Although, time for more tin foil... Just how much of Skylake is still the old "Core" arch if this flaw affects every gen since? I mean it's obvious Intel has plenty of tech up its sleeve for the future. The chief executives and engineers aren't fools. That said, how much have all these "new" architectures since really done to be fundamentally different as per Intel's tick-tock marketing materials?

[xteron]

Is there any "reliable" sources that Intel knew about this before 2017?

[mr moose]

5 minutes ago, xteron said:

Is there any "reliable" sources that Intel knew about this before 2017?

Not that I've seen.  The earliest known mention is in June when google security discovered it and told AMD, ARM, VIA and Intel.

EDIT: I am guessing they probably also told Apple and MS seeing as they are both working on the fixes.