[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: AMD crash bug

I'm not sure that the microcode is vulnerable per se, simply that they fixed it via a microcode update (which again blurs the line between hardware/software rather a lot if this is a "hardware" bug =). .

On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 7:13 PM, Pascal Meunier <pmeunier@cerias.purdue.edu> wrote:
IMO giving an ID to vulnerable microcode fits the goals of the CVE, both
originally and now.  Lovely catch, Kurt.


On Fri, 2017-03-24 at 00:43 +0000, Landfield, Kent B wrote:
> I agree. This seems to be in need of a CVE. Is AMD aware of it?
> Kent Landfield
> +1.817.637.8026
> On Mar 23, 2017, at 7:34 PM, Kurt Seifried <kurt@seifried.org<mailto:kurt@seifried.org>> wrote:
> So a Linux/Windows kernel crash triggered by a normal user would get a CVE. Why doesn't this get a CVE? Especially as it's fixable with a microcode update...
> http://forum.hwbot.org/showthread.php?t=167605
> http://forum.hwbot.org/showpost.php?p=480524
> https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13924192
> I think we need to cover hardware cases where it bricks/crashes the system/hardware at a minimum.
> Also I always thought AMD was a CNA, but they're not?
> --
> Kurt Seifried
> kurt@seifried.org<mailto:kurt@seifried.org>


Kurt Seifried -- Red Hat -- Product Security -- Cloud
PGP A90B F995 7350 148F 66BF 7554 160D 4553 5E26 7993
Red Hat Product Security contact: secalert@redhat.com

Page Last Updated or Reviewed: March 27, 2017