Dark Reading is part of the Informa Tech Division of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them.Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

Security Management //

Patch Management

1/24/2018
09:05 AM
Larry Loeb
Larry Loeb
Larry Loeb
50%
50%

Linus Torvalds: Intel's Spectre Patch Is 'Complete & Utter Garbage'

In a scathing assessment of Intel's efforts to patch the Spectre flaw, Linux inventor Linus Torvalds offers no quarter for the chipmaker.

The patching for Spectre isn't going well.

Earlier this week, Intel Corp. (Nasdaq: INTC) was forced to advise its customers -- that means OEMs, cloud service providers, system manufacturers, software vendors, end users, etc. -- to stop deployment of the Spectre patch and await further information. Unexpected system reboots were cited as the immediate cause, along with "other unpredictable system behavior."

Not only that, Linux inventor Linus Torvalds took to a Linux kernel mailing list on Sunday, January 21, to call Intel's approach to fixing Spectre "COMPLETE AND UTTER GARBAGE." (The capitalization for emphasis is his.)

Torvalds is OK with what Intel is doing for the Meltdown problem, however. (See New Intel Vulnerability Hits Almost Everyone.)

"The speculation control cpuid stuff shows that Intel actually seems to plan on doing the right thing for meltdown (the main question being _when_)," Torvalds wrote.

But the Spectre -- the branch target injection design flaw affecting most of its processor chips -- response causes him to ask: "WHAT THE F*CK IS GOING ON?"

Torvalds sees Intel playing games to make the benchmarks look better. As he puts it:

The whole IBRS_ALL feature to me very clearly says Intel is not serious about this, we'll have a ugly hack that will be so expensive that we don't want to enable it by default, because that would look bad in benchmarks.

Indirect Branch Restricted Speculation (IBRS) is the part of the patching that restricts speculation of indirect program branches.

Torvalds sums up his aversions by writing in the message that to him, the whole point of having CPUID and flags from the microarchitecture -- like IBRS_ALL -- is that they can be used make decisions.

However, since people already know that the IBRS overhead is very large on existing hardware, the hardware capability bits will be totally not useful. Torvalds thinks that "nobody sane will use them, since the cost is too damn high."

Torvalds does have a point here.

In its official position paper, Intel doesn't treat Spectre as a bug. Instead the chipmaker is offering Spectre protection as a feature. The company implicitly admits the vulnerability will be present in future CPUs, but it gives users an opt-in flag for their solution. This is the approach that Torvalds find abhorrent.

What Torvalds says that he wants is to see is some flag from the CPU saying that it has been fixed against Spectre, so that the OS does not have to impose its own fixes. He thinks the Spectre fix should be defaulted to on, regardless of the performance hit.

This stuff will remain a contentious area for a long time. Intel is getting tripped up by its rush to get a fix out the door, and not doing the validation that a major change of this magnitude needs. It also may have been influenced by liability issues implicit in the problem and trying to downplay just how serious the problem is to most of its customers.

In any case, it may serve users well to hold back on applying any patches that may result from this effort until they have been shown to be effective and do not cause instabilities of their own.

Related posts:

— Larry Loeb has written for many of the last century's major "dead tree" computer magazines, having been, among other things, a consulting editor for BYTE magazine and senior editor for the launch of WebWeek.

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
COVID-19: Latest Security News & Commentary
Dark Reading Staff 9/21/2020
Hacking Yourself: Marie Moe and Pacemaker Security
Gary McGraw Ph.D., Co-founder Berryville Institute of Machine Learning,  9/21/2020
Startup Aims to Map and Track All the IT and Security Things
Kelly Jackson Higgins, Executive Editor at Dark Reading,  9/22/2020
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon
Current Issue
Special Report: Computing's New Normal
This special report examines how IT security organizations have adapted to the "new normal" of computing and what the long-term effects will be. Read it and get a unique set of perspectives on issues ranging from new threats & vulnerabilities as a result of remote working to how enterprise security strategy will be affected long term.
Flash Poll
How IT Security Organizations are Attacking the Cybersecurity Problem
How IT Security Organizations are Attacking the Cybersecurity Problem
The COVID-19 pandemic turned the world -- and enterprise computing -- on end. Here's a look at how cybersecurity teams are retrenching their defense strategies, rebuilding their teams, and selecting new technologies to stop the oncoming rise of online attacks.
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2020-13991
PUBLISHED: 2020-09-24
vm/opcodes.c in JerryScript 2.2.0 allows attackers to hijack the flow of control by controlling a register.
CVE-2020-15160
PUBLISHED: 2020-09-24
PrestaShop from version 1.7.5.0 and before version 1.7.6.8 is vulnerable to a blind SQL Injection attack in the Catalog Product edition page with location parameter. The problem is fixed in 1.7.6.8
CVE-2020-15162
PUBLISHED: 2020-09-24
In PrestaShop from version 1.5.0.0 and before version 1.7.6.8, users are allowed to send compromised files. These attachments allowed people to input malicious JavaScript which triggered an XSS payload. The problem is fixed in version 1.7.6.8.
CVE-2020-15843
PUBLISHED: 2020-09-24
ActFax Version 7.10 Build 0335 (2020-05-25) is susceptible to a privilege escalation vulnerability due to insecure folder permissions on %PROGRAMFILES%\ActiveFax\Client\, %PROGRAMFILES%\ActiveFax\Install\ and %PROGRAMFILES%\ActiveFax\Terminal\. The folder permissions allow "Full Control" t...
CVE-2020-17365
PUBLISHED: 2020-09-24
Improper directory permissions in the Hotspot Shield VPN client software for Windows 10.3.0 and earlier may allow an authorized user to potentially enable escalation of privilege via local access. The vulnerability allows a local user to corrupt system files: a local user can create a specially craf...