this post was submitted on 13 Aug 2023
973 points (99.0% liked)

Technology

59446 readers
4749 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
L3s@fry.gs
L4s@fry.gs
L4s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
973
Intel 'Downfall': Severe flaw in billions of CPUs leaks passwords and much more (www.pcworld.com)
submitted 1 year ago by theunmentionable@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world
168 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Oh no.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] FaceDeer@kbin.social 5 points 1 year ago

Yes, but all the data that I care about is in my single human user's account already. If I install malicious software then I'm already hooped regardless.

Look, I'm not saying this is no biggie. There are plenty of systems out there that will have to install this patch. Single-user computers probably should too. The situation I'm addressing is the case where a gaming computer has its performance as a gaming measurably harmed by the patch's overhead, which is reportedly significant in some cases. In those cases it's reasonable to weigh the merits and decide that this vulnerability isn't all that big a problem.