Wasn’t it that those bugs were public knowledge by the time M1 was starting to sell? I guess recalls or delays to revenue are not acceptable.
Trophy for Apple being the first one to bring these speculative execution side channel attacks to Arm, because I’ve never heard of other cases. Ifi missed that please share enough details that I can find a white paper about it, because I don’t read those kind of news from media.
Side channel attacks are as old as computing, and the specific CPU variants exploiting speculative execution have not simply occurred on 2018 hardware and stopped since; pretty much all CPU architecture is susceptible to some form of speculative execution exploit, Apple simply is not an exception to the rule, and I think it’s unfair to call them out as somehow incompetent for making the same mistake as literally everyone
That’s a cool article, I had a quick read and will go back to it later.
Inter-Process Interrupt seems to be very cool, but the fact you have to start it exactly when a pointer in the kernel is created makes it a big hit and miss, and the fact one cpu is frozen during the process may make it easy to detect she counter.
I can and will call Apple many things such as unusually greedy, the new Microsoft that got big decade ago and have to buy companies to have new successful products, marketing brainwashing, cult and more. But not incompetent when it comes to M1.
M1 laptops performance is not due to what most people believe, and all the side channel attacks unique to it I’ve heard from, come from speculative memory address loads. It’s pushing speculation in directions neither Intel nor AMD or Arm chips did before, and they’re released in a time where side channel attacks are starting to be very l well understood.
I’m sure there was an engineer saying this was a bad idea, over ruled by a manager under the pressure of CFO to make it happen. So I blame this on greed.
Yep sure that’s the definition of a 0 day vulnerability, it was always there and suddenly someone found out.
What I’m saying is that I have a special interest in this topic and never heard of this problem for Arm before, and if some has more awareness than me I’d like to hear more from trusted sources.
Wasn’t it that those bugs were public knowledge by the time M1 was starting to sell? I guess recalls or delays to revenue are not acceptable.
Trophy for Apple being the first one to bring these speculative execution side channel attacks to Arm, because I’ve never heard of other cases. Ifi missed that please share enough details that I can find a white paper about it, because I don’t read those kind of news from media.
Side channel attacks are as old as computing, and the specific CPU variants exploiting speculative execution have not simply occurred on 2018 hardware and stopped since; pretty much all CPU architecture is susceptible to some form of speculative execution exploit, Apple simply is not an exception to the rule, and I think it’s unfair to call them out as somehow incompetent for making the same mistake as literally everyone
https://www.vusec.net/projects/ghostrace/
That’s a cool article, I had a quick read and will go back to it later.
Inter-Process Interrupt seems to be very cool, but the fact you have to start it exactly when a pointer in the kernel is created makes it a big hit and miss, and the fact one cpu is frozen during the process may make it easy to detect she counter.
I can and will call Apple many things such as unusually greedy, the new Microsoft that got big decade ago and have to buy companies to have new successful products, marketing brainwashing, cult and more. But not incompetent when it comes to M1.
M1 laptops performance is not due to what most people believe, and all the side channel attacks unique to it I’ve heard from, come from speculative memory address loads. It’s pushing speculation in directions neither Intel nor AMD or Arm chips did before, and they’re released in a time where side channel attacks are starting to be very l well understood.
I’m sure there was an engineer saying this was a bad idea, over ruled by a manager under the pressure of CFO to make it happen. So I blame this on greed.
That you’ve never heard of it does not mean it doesn’t exist. You - or anyone else - just never heard of it.
Yep sure that’s the definition of a 0 day vulnerability, it was always there and suddenly someone found out.
What I’m saying is that I have a special interest in this topic and never heard of this problem for Arm before, and if some has more awareness than me I’d like to hear more from trusted sources.