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

[Misanthrope]

40 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

How exactly will this "force Intel into not fucking up again"?

Losing billions would make them be far more vigilant.

 

The rest of your post it's intentionally omitted since I don't respond to whataboutism.

[LAwLz]

3 hours ago, Misanthrope said:

Losing billions would make them be far more vigilant.

 

The rest of your post it's intentionally omitted since I don't respond to whataboutism.

There is no whataboutism in my question. I am asking you, do you believe Intel should be sued? If you do, do you also believe AMD, Nvidia, ARM and the rest who are also vulnerable should be sued too?

 

Also, I don't believe they would be more careful if they got sued, because this was basically out of their control.

[Misanthrope]

8 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

There is no whataboutism in my question. I am asking you, do you believe Intel should be sued? If you do, do you also believe AMD, Nvidia, ARM and the rest who are also vulnerable should be sued too?

 

Also, I don't believe they would be more careful if they got sued, because this was basically out of their control.

Asking that question in an of itself is whataboutism: Everyone affected by the bug should be sued of course, to the degree in which they're actually affected which is far less when it comes to AMD afaik.

 

And whenever or not is out of their control I think will be reviewed in court, extensively, since the claim (or one of them at least) it's negligence on the part of intel so the plaintiff has to make that case so we'll see how that turns out.

 

EDIT: Lots of edits I can't spell for shit today, sorry about that.

[mynameisjuan]

4 hours ago, LAwLz said:

Also, do you believe AMD, ARM, Nvidia, Apple, Samsung, IBM, etc, etc should get sued too? 

I dont get why people cant understand this simple point. Doesnt matter if intel is affected more than all the others, the others are affected and wouldhave be included in this lawsuit. 

 

Most people here just say "sue intel" because its intel and "AMD doesnt deserve it because they are the underdogs"....The bias here is out of control

 

[mynameisjuan]

3 minutes ago, Misanthrope said:

Asking that question in an of itself is whataboutism: Everyone affected by the bug should be sued of course, to the degree in which they're actually affected which is far less when it comes to AMD afaik.

 

And whenever or not is out of their control I think will be reviewed in court, extensively, since the claim (or one of them at least) it's negligence on the part of intel so the plaintiff has to make that case so we'll see how that turns out.

 

EDIT: Lots of edits I can't spell for shit today, sorry about that.

So why is AMDs penalty less? The suit is because the bug, not how much they affect performance

 

Also bugs are not fucking because of negligence. This is a malicious attack which is based on manipulating code. The processors are doing what is told, its bullshit that you think bugs should be sued over.

[ItsMitch]

Just now, mynameisjuan said:

Also bugs are not fucking because of negligence

If you leave a gaping security hole in your processors for well over a decade then you shouldn't cry when the solicitors come knocking on the door, Intel should of done a little bit more, maybe pushed back Coffee lake until this was resolved, not push it out the door faster.

[Misanthrope]

Just now, mynameisjuan said:

So why is AMDs penalty less? The suit is because the bug, not how much they affect performance

 

Also bugs are not fucking because of negligence. This is a malicious attack which is based on manipulating code. The processors are doing what is told, its bullshit that you think bugs should be sued over.

Because it is not affected by Meltdown, only Spectre or whatever is called. Different bug, different way to deal with it, different way to correct it, etc. Again AFAIK Meltdown which is the more severe, requiring the OS patch, it's intel only.

[mynameisjuan]

6 minutes ago, SC2Mitch said:

If you leave a gaping security hole in your processors for well over a decade then you shouldn't cry when the solicitors come knocking on the door, Intel should of done a little bit more, maybe pushed back Coffee lake until this was resolved, not push it out the door faster.

Leaving a security flaw on purpose is different than taking decades to find it. 

5 minutes ago, Misanthrope said:

Because it is not affected by Meltdown, only Spectre or whatever is called. Different bug, different way to deal with it, different way to correct it, etc. Again AFAIK Meltdown which is the more severe, requiring the OS patch, it's intel only.

Both are bad. If intel is going to be sued over meltdown and spectre, than AMD, ARM..etc.. should be sued over spectre. 

[PocketNerd]

Let's be a little more rational here, folks... just because Intel is the only one being sued right now doesn't mean that folks won't produce lawsuits for AMD or ARM.

That said, Intel is certainly the worst offender out of the three. Because if I recall correctly, those researchers mucked with default settings to get the bug to occur on AMD CPUs.

[Misanthrope]

38 minutes ago, mynameisjuan said:

Both are bad.

Both don't need to be considered in the same lawsuit since they're not the same. Make a separate thread to talk about AMD and potential liability on the separate issue.

[mr moose]

20 hours ago, Jito463 said:

 

No, but constantly trying to defend Intel by saying, 'Hey, look at AMD!' does.  I get it, Spectre (to varying degrees) affects Intel, AMD and ARM, but this is about Meltdown.

 

 

Everyone else has addressed the points I have made, however with this one I would hardly call bringing up AMD once as an example (that I clearly said I wasn't berating them for) could be considered constantly.

[mr moose]

1 hour ago, mynameisjuan said:

I dont get why people cant understand this simple point. Doesnt matter if intel is affected more than all the others, the others are affected and wouldhave be included in this lawsuit. 

 

Most people here just say "sue intel" because its intel and "AMD doesnt deserve it because they are the underdogs"....The bias here is out of control

 

What I find out of control is how people are confusing what is currently an uncontrollable attribute of CPU manufacture with some sort of intention negligence.   Either people just want to hang Intel or they genuinely have no idea how bugs come to be and the inherent issues discovering security bugs.  Either way, it has been explained enough times that anyone who continues to claim intent or ineptitude does so because they aren't concerned with facts. 

[mynameisjuan]

1 minute ago, mr moose said:

 Either people just want to hang Intel or they genuinely have no idea how bugs come to be and the inherent issues discovering security bugs. 

People just dont understand how bugs come about nor how people are purposely trying to exploit things. In everyday use this bug has NO IMPACT on users until acted on maliciously. Bugs should never ever be allowed to be sued over. 

 

 

[Bit_Guardian]

7 hours ago, Misanthrope said:

"LOL Americans and their frivolous lawsuits!"

"LMAO Warranty claims? Like how?"

"Just some Lawyers will get rich because they're opportunistic"

 

And so and so on.

 

To all people making this comments: Perhaps we should force AMD off the market, put you all back on 4 core chips for another 5 years and double their prices instead, would that make you happy? No?

 

Then focus on the important thing which is Intel getting punished into not ever fucking up this bad again. 

Intel will get punished enough by their customers in the market. These lawsuits are frivolous, and Intel will in all likelihood win. All Intel has to argue is Coffee Lake was Kaby Lake with a reduced price increase structure. It was in no way a "new" defective product.

[Bit_Guardian]

1 hour ago, Misanthrope said:

Asking that question in an of itself is whataboutism: Everyone affected by the bug should be sued of course, to the degree in which they're actually affected which is far less when it comes to AMD afaik.

 

And whenever or not is out of their control I think will be reviewed in court, extensively, since the claim (or one of them at least) it's negligence on the part of intel so the plaintiff has to make that case so we'll see how that turns out.

 

EDIT: Lots of edits I can't spell for shit today, sorry about that.

No, whataboutism is pure deflection. Lawlz is testing whether or not you're a hypocrite. Trump keeps using whataboutism to deflect attention away from him to Clinton. A third party asking you if both should be prosecuted for the same illegal actions is not a whataboutism. It's a hypocrisy test.

 

So far, it seems you lack the ability to see that distinction. Lawlz is correct. This is an "if and only if" situation. Either no one affected by this bug deserves to be sued, or they all do. Intel should be sued if and only if AMD, ARM, IBM, Oracle, and Imagination Technologies (MIPS) are sued over a speculative execution bug since it blindsided all of them.

[Misanthrope]

3 minutes ago, Bit_Guardian said:

No,

Can you then point me to the lawsuit (any) where it explicit states they will be taking into consideration both Meltdown and Spectre on the same action?

 

The action seem to be referring to only one bug or flaw and Lawyers are smart enough to consider this. But maybe they aren't so can you show me Spectre is also considered here?

 

If not, we're done.

[Bit_Guardian]

14 minutes ago, Misanthrope said:

Can you then point me to the lawsuit (any) where it explicit states they will be taking into consideration both Meltdown and Spectre on the same action?

 

The action seem to be referring to only one bug or flaw and Lawyers are smart enough to consider this. But maybe they aren't so can you show me Spectre is also considered here?

 

If not, we're done.

Have you read the lawsuit filings? The ones in California and Washington both cite Spectre.

[LAwLz]

6 hours ago, Misanthrope said:

Asking that question in an of itself is whataboutism: Everyone affected by the bug should be sued of course, to the degree in which they're actually affected which is far less when it comes to AMD afaik.

 

And whenever or not is out of their control I think will be reviewed in court, extensively, since the claim (or one of them at least) it's negligence on the part of intel so the plaintiff has to make that case so we'll see how that turns out.

 

EDIT: Lots of edits I can't spell for shit today, sorry about that.

OK so we have established that you think bugs which affect the security of a product should be grounds for being sued. Do you also think this way when it comes to software? For example if a bug is discovered in Bash (which it was a while ago) the authors of Bash should be liable?

 

I think this is an extremely dangerous slippery slope which will end very badly for the entire hardware and software industry. Especially since bugs are so common and often near impossible to check for before it is out on the market. I mean, Spectre is an entries category of attacks which had gone unnoticed by tens of massive companies (Intel, AMD and ARM to name a few) for decades.

To suddenly expect flawless products is silly and shows a complete lack of touch with the real world of security and bug hunting.

 

I hope Intel wins these lawsuits, the ones suing has to pay for all the legal fees and it sets a precedence. The tech industry needs to stop with these moronic lawsuits flying around. We should all be striving for fewer lawsuits.