Sapphire Radeon RX 7600 PULSE review
Gainward GeForce RTX 4060 Ti GHOST review
Radeon RX 7600 review
ASUS GeForce RTX 4060 Ti TUF Gaming review
MSI GeForce RTX 4060 Ti Gaming X TRIO review
GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 8GB (FE) review
Corsair 2000D RGB Airflow Mini-ITX - PC chassis review
ASUS PG27AQDM Review - 240Hz 1440p OLED monitor
MSI MAG X670E Tomahawk WiFi review
Mountain Makalu Max mouse review
AMD also gets sued for Spectre
Not just Intel, chip manufacturer AMD now also has been sued for the Spectre security leak. It is a so-called 'class action' lawsuit filed on behalf of the company's investors.
In the indictment, both AMD, the financial director and director of the company, are accused of having artificially increased the share price of the company by not previously announcing that AMD processors are vulnerable to the Specter leak. AMD was informed at the beginning of June last year, sources claim.
Spectre came to light earlier this month with the Meltdown vulnerability and, in contrast to this vulnerability, affects virtually all modern computers, smartphones, and tablets. Investors of the company have, according to the charges, "made significant losses" as a result of the price drop after the publication of the leak.
A spokesperson for AMD told The Register that the company found the accusations unfounded, reports nu.nl. Four lawsuits have already been filed against competitor Intel because of Spectre and Meltdown.
gx-x
Senior Member
Posts: 1521
Joined: 2007-03-18
Senior Member
Posts: 1521
Joined: 2007-03-18
#5512484 Posted on: 01/20/2018 03:12 AM
they are not bugs. They are features that someone found a way to exploit. Like, you can use a space shuttle full of fuel and crash it down into a city and kill thousands of people. Get sued for a bug.
understand? Predictive branching is not a bug, but a beneficial feature that can be exploited.
Now lets all go back to cave age because new stuff can be exploited.
He made the schedule well after learning about the bugs. The bugs were reported to the affected parties a long time ago, after all, not mere months but half a year. According to the man it's "unrelated". Sure.
they are not bugs. They are features that someone found a way to exploit. Like, you can use a space shuttle full of fuel and crash it down into a city and kill thousands of people. Get sued for a bug.
understand? Predictive branching is not a bug, but a beneficial feature that can be exploited.
Now lets all go back to cave age because new stuff can be exploited.
sykozis
Senior Member
Posts: 22469
Joined: 2008-07-14
Senior Member
Posts: 22469
Joined: 2008-07-14
#5512492 Posted on: 01/20/2018 04:29 AM
This suit was filed by a law firm on behalf of AMD investors. Now, read that statement. It doesn't say that a group of investors filed a lawsuit. It says a law firm. In other words, greedy lawyers looking for their next paycheck. AMD and Intel can both use that in their own defense. Now the lawyers have to prove beyond any reasonable doubt that a large portion of investors were in fact harmed financially and intentionally by Intel or AMD (depending on the case they're involved in). If either fails, they're at the mercy of Intel's or AMD's lawyers.... Only the initial 2 cases filed against Intel were actually filed by people who felt they were wronged. To call these "class-action" suits at this point would be a bit misguided. It's actually not possible to file a "class-action" suit. The lawyers file the initial lawsuit and then after providing sufficient evidence, request a judge to elevate the suit to "class-action" status, which requires the lawyers to then prove beyond any reasonable doubt that the claims made in the initial filing directly affect a large number of people. In this case, they'll likely also have to prove that disclosure was withheld solely for the purposes of profit, which can't be done. If these suits fail in court, both Intel and/or AMD have legal grounds to retaliate against the original filer of the suits by charging that they filed a frivolous lawsuit.
By reading this thread and the equivalent Intel thread from a week ago?
The only equivalent thread concerning Intel that I'm aware of, is the thread that I started. Within that thread, there is no praise for AMD nor bashing of Intel.
Suing solves everything.
Stupid Americans.
While a large portion of Americans are stupid....there are some of us that question the logic behind this as well as the original lawsuits against Intel for loss of product value as a result of vulnerability mitigations.
The amount of stock he sold is consistent with other years and was planned out months in advance (it takes a long time to sell that much stock properly). There is no proof that this had anything to do with these bugs yet everyone online ASSUMES it must because they KNOW that Intel is evil.
Brian Krzanich established his 10b-5 in October 2017 and executed the sale of stock in November 2017. He had full knowledge of both "Meltdown" and "Spectre" when he established his 10b-5 in October 2017, and when the stock sale resulting from the 10b-5 took place in November 2017. This is of public record. An investigation has already begun into the stock sale. If evidence exists to justify criminal charges, they'll likely be filed. If no such evidence exists, he'll get a slap on the wrist from Intel's legal department and told not to do it again. Either way, a proper investigation is about finding truth and the truth is all that matters. As a CEO with knowledge of a major vulnerability, he should have known better than to sell his stock prior to public disclosure, regardless of his intentions. Poor judgement doesn't necessarily make one guilty of a crime and to assume such is ignorant. However, if he chose to sell that stock before public disclosure purely for financial reasons, that would make him guilty. Either way, people need to hold off on passing judgement until the investigation concludes.
As for these lawsuits, in MY opinion....they're all BS.
This suit was filed by a law firm on behalf of AMD investors. Now, read that statement. It doesn't say that a group of investors filed a lawsuit. It says a law firm. In other words, greedy lawyers looking for their next paycheck. AMD and Intel can both use that in their own defense. Now the lawyers have to prove beyond any reasonable doubt that a large portion of investors were in fact harmed financially and intentionally by Intel or AMD (depending on the case they're involved in). If either fails, they're at the mercy of Intel's or AMD's lawyers.... Only the initial 2 cases filed against Intel were actually filed by people who felt they were wronged. To call these "class-action" suits at this point would be a bit misguided. It's actually not possible to file a "class-action" suit. The lawyers file the initial lawsuit and then after providing sufficient evidence, request a judge to elevate the suit to "class-action" status, which requires the lawyers to then prove beyond any reasonable doubt that the claims made in the initial filing directly affect a large number of people. In this case, they'll likely also have to prove that disclosure was withheld solely for the purposes of profit, which can't be done. If these suits fail in court, both Intel and/or AMD have legal grounds to retaliate against the original filer of the suits by charging that they filed a frivolous lawsuit.
By reading this thread and the equivalent Intel thread from a week ago?
The only equivalent thread concerning Intel that I'm aware of, is the thread that I started. Within that thread, there is no praise for AMD nor bashing of Intel.
Suing solves everything.
Stupid Americans.
While a large portion of Americans are stupid....there are some of us that question the logic behind this as well as the original lawsuits against Intel for loss of product value as a result of vulnerability mitigations.
The amount of stock he sold is consistent with other years and was planned out months in advance (it takes a long time to sell that much stock properly). There is no proof that this had anything to do with these bugs yet everyone online ASSUMES it must because they KNOW that Intel is evil.
Brian Krzanich established his 10b-5 in October 2017 and executed the sale of stock in November 2017. He had full knowledge of both "Meltdown" and "Spectre" when he established his 10b-5 in October 2017, and when the stock sale resulting from the 10b-5 took place in November 2017. This is of public record. An investigation has already begun into the stock sale. If evidence exists to justify criminal charges, they'll likely be filed. If no such evidence exists, he'll get a slap on the wrist from Intel's legal department and told not to do it again. Either way, a proper investigation is about finding truth and the truth is all that matters. As a CEO with knowledge of a major vulnerability, he should have known better than to sell his stock prior to public disclosure, regardless of his intentions. Poor judgement doesn't necessarily make one guilty of a crime and to assume such is ignorant. However, if he chose to sell that stock before public disclosure purely for financial reasons, that would make him guilty. Either way, people need to hold off on passing judgement until the investigation concludes.
As for these lawsuits, in MY opinion....they're all BS.
Kaarme
Senior Member
Posts: 3404
Joined: 2013-03-10
Senior Member
Posts: 3404
Joined: 2013-03-10
#5512563 Posted on: 01/20/2018 11:13 AM
they are not bugs. They are features that someone found a way to exploit. Like, you can use a space shuttle full of fuel and crash it down into a city and kill thousands of people. Get sued for a bug.
understand? Predictive branching is not a bug, but a beneficial feature that can be exploited.
Now lets all go back to cave age because new stuff can be exploited.
I know what it is. I called it a bug because it's a shorter word than an exploitable feature (which is in fact two words).
they are not bugs. They are features that someone found a way to exploit. Like, you can use a space shuttle full of fuel and crash it down into a city and kill thousands of people. Get sued for a bug.
understand? Predictive branching is not a bug, but a beneficial feature that can be exploited.
Now lets all go back to cave age because new stuff can be exploited.
I know what it is. I called it a bug because it's a shorter word than an exploitable feature (which is in fact two words).
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 13845
Joined: 2003-05-24
people here like it, sorta like people hate on seagate here, and pretty much anything else so long llama gets it pound of drama