Here we are - 3600 which was still under manufacture 2-3 years ago are not get patched. Shame on you AMD, if it is true.

  • Victor@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    What I meant was exactly that, which you corroborated as correct. You’d first have to already compromise these systems, in order to be able to exploit this vulnerability. That’s as I understood it. It’s that correct?

    Gosh, it’s not easy getting my point across here today, I’m sorry.

    All I’m saying is that I don’t think AMD is doing this to us, on purpose. I think it’s just happened, and they’re not handling it very well, even though it’s somewhat understandable. At least to me. 🤷‍♂️

    But then again, I have no reason to be attacked or have my system compromised, so my situation is better than others’, perhaps.

    • Grippler
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      I think what most people disagree with, is that the active choice from AMD to not fix a very fixable issue, is a choice they know leaves customers is a seriously bad position. This is something they choose to do to their customers, because they could just as well choose to help them.

      • Victor@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        they could just as well choose to help them.

        I think that’s what I have a hard time believing. If they could “just as well” help, it is my belief that they also would. Because I don’t think they’re morons. I think they know this hurts their reputation. There has to be some obstacle, be it financial or lack of man power or… something. That is my belief.

        Don’t you (all) think that sounds more likely than them just leaving their customers in the dark for no other reason than not having to do work?

        • Grippler
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          Of course there’s a financial reason, they’ve probably done a cost/benefit analysis and decided that it’s financially better to screw over those customers than to spend money fixing it. But that’s exactly the issue!

          • Victor@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            I mean… 🤷‍♂️ The analysis is made, decision made. I probably have an affected system but… What’s the real risk for private end users? Should I really be so concerned?

            • Grippler
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              4 months ago

              Should you really be concerned about a system that can be physically ruined by malware? I would say definitely yes…

              • Victor@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                4 months ago

                I haven’t had malware on any of my computers for 20+ years. 🤷‍♂️ Ever since I stopped clicking on shitty links on shitty sites and downloading shitty files with unknown contents and such behavior. I don’t think I’m worried. I’m not the target group for these kinds of attacks, I think.