https://liliputing.com/2018/01/samsung-introduces-exynos-9810-processor-ai-multi
media-enhancements.html




Smartphone chips keep getting faster, but it takes more than speed to stand out these days. So Samsung isn’t just talking about how its new Exynos 9810 chip is faster than its predecessors. The company says the new chip also has a faster LTE modem and enhanced support for “deep learning enhanced image processing,” among other things.

In fact, Samsung’s press release suggests the Exynos 9810 isn’t just for phones. It could also be used in automotive systems and other products that might need the ability to process a lot of visual data quickly (like a light thin laptop running Win 10s or in an automotive guidance system).

The upcoming Exynos 9810 is a 2.9 GHz octa-core processor built using a 10nm process. It uses four high-power custom CPU cores and four lower-power cores.

Samsung says it offers up to 40 percent better multi-core performance and up to 2 times the single-core performance of last year’s Exynos 8895 chip.

Other features include a dedicated security processing unit for protecting biometric data including fingerprint, iris, and face recognition information, a Cat,18 LTE modem with support for 1.2 Gbps download and 200 Mbps upload speeds, and an updated multi-format codec for faster and more efficient processing of images and visual data.

It's not hard to see what they are doing when the situation is like this.

Aaand it's a good thing he got it done.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/design-flaw-found-intel-chips-fix-causes-them-1529...


I wonder if he's gonna get the Martha Stewart treatment..

https://liliputing.com/2018/01/intel-amd-arm-weigh-spectre-meltdown-security-vul
nerabilities-discovered-googles-project-zero.html

The third level of reporter checks are done now, with vendors officially asked and officially actually responding since the secret is officially out now.

Intel is the only one who has not ALREADY effectively dealt with the Spectre and Meltdown issues even though their processors are the ones most greatly affected.   And yes, the 17% to 50% slowdown issue is real, although the number is indeed variable according to the tasks at hand.  

Intel is still saying it isn't their issue to fix, but that patches will go out from Microsoft on a nightly update sometimes soon.

In the low integrity vague brown vapor land where Intel lives,  Intel is innocent since all their equipment was built to "strict published processor industry standards" and this attack vector is just like any other virus/trojan attack in the last 20 years, something that needs patching in the OS software.   It is not needing to be addressed in the years old physical hardware itself, which is quite impossible to do anyway.  

So, Intel is "doing everybody else a favor" by helping them while they are working on these software fixes, in Intel's brown tinted eyes anyway.

It is up to a court room to dice this all out, I am afraid.   There are many hundreds of companies adversely affected by the data breaches that used this exploit and there are many Millions of users that will be affected by the processing slow downs required by the fix itself.

Intel is taking a drubbing in the press, with image losses and trust issues galore as they are the dead last to announce the issues or to fix anything.    

Should Intel be held liable for baulking at announcing the issues, in not pursuing the fixes and for letting more and more machines be built (and more and more password data to be lost) since they were first informed of the issues over a year ago?

In the EU, the answer will be YES, Intel is liable.    In America, not such a clear cut answer as the NSA required backdoor issue has been raised yet again by Intel's tame press pundits.

In China, the answer will be both quick, clear cut and FIRMLY ENFORCED by AK47 wielding troops, ASAP, military style.   China is not pleased about another back door being built and quite artfully concealed deep inside the Intel processor itself.   Ditto for Germany and France.

People have been asking how the heck Russia has been getting access to all these various secured computers all over the world so easily ...... I think they have their answer now ......

"Fool me once, shame on you --- fool me twice, shame on me --- fool me again, you get shot."


===================================================


The late boys roll their fixes finally,  everybody but Intel that is  ......   no fixes coming from Intel yet at all.

https://liliputing.com/2018/01/security-updates-help-protect-meltdown-spectre-at
tacks-starting-roll.html

Let me please remind you, that this situation was uncovered by Google, the early fixes were orchestrated by Google, Linux and FOSS.  

May I also remind the people who are "afraid of Google" because the Wintel shills told them to be afraid of Google ---- they are being afraid of the wrong people and are definitely listening to the wrong sources when making these decisions.

Rule of thumb, if Google is acting in concert with Linux and FOSS and you see all three doing it together, then whatever it is it is always as clean as the new fallen snow.

Alphabet acting by itself, eh, look twice ...... self interest can creep in.

   Intel and MS are always suspect no matter what they do

OK, I run Linux on a 10 year old Intel processor equipped Dell CAD box, so I have to actually go do something to protect myself from Spectre and Meltdown.   I am using Intel and I must be protected from Intel itself ......

Why do I have to do something ???    Simply because Linux requires the user to control security settings.  Linux does not allow itself to change your computer in any major fashion behind your back, ever.   YOU run Linux, not vice versa.

Amount of time to do it, less than 30 seconds.   Trouble to do it, copy a line of stuff to the Chrome Browser bar and hit enter, then flip the switch you see to green, then exit out of the stuff back to normal land.  

Knowledge required to set that line of stuff up -- quite a lot I suspect -- but knowledge needed by the real end user is approaching zero.   Copy, paste, enter, click once, exit.

What did I turn on?   I enabled the new advanced sandboxing feature in my Chrome browser (and it was already sitting there, waiting on me to turn it on) the same sandboxing thing that has always existed in Chrome OS.    

Yes, this is brand new thing of a month or so ago, part of the FOSS group efforts against Meltdown and Spectre.    If you run Chrome browser on Windows, you have the same stuff available to you, or you will shortly when Microsoft gets around to including the capability to use it inside itself.

There are other smaller things that have been quietly done, inside Linux Mint and inside Chrome browser, that finish up the job by changing how long things can be kept in cache, but I had to turn them on with my one little lighted box mouse click.

Chromebook users had NOTHING to do to fix anything, Google took care of it during an update over a month ago.   Remember, Chromebook style ChromeOS  isn't pure Linux, it is Google's read on what people really really want, which is never to have to think about it or deal with it, ever, period.    

What is the diff between my old Dell Optiplex Core Duo box and a Google Chromebook at this point in time, even if I had a total loss event?    A new Chromebook could be physically gotten and I would get my world back instantly upon my first log-in should I have the machine stolen or physically destroyed.    

Anything less than a physical destruction event or an outright theft is handled by a 5 minute Power Wash (an over the air reload of all ChromeOS systems and all your personal preferences).

Chromebooks still sits at the pinnacle of ease of use, that is simply what Google does with Chromebooks.   Anyone can live with a Chromebook ..... it is seriously that easy to use.

The Dell based Linux box would have to be rebuilt by layers, taking at least 4-6 hours of work by me, with the time spread out over the first week of use.    Time to reformat a drive and install the Linux software and all the apps off a DVD would only be less than 1 hour of that, tweeking and tuning all the little stuff to look like mine would be the rest of the time.

Six hours of normal use later ........

I have not noticed any slowdown, but logically I am using some more memory (since each tab uses a separate chunk of memory now) and my sandboxes all get raked smooth every 15-30 seconds and then each sandbox gets re-loaded to make sure NOTHING remains still for any length of time to be vacuumed up by a malware so I am taking up a little more processing time and and a little more memory doing normal things.  

But I run a light fast Linux OS system on a 10 year old (obsolete) Dell engineering CAD box that has WAY WAY WAY more resources than are needed to run Linux, so I think I am plenty good to go.

I do detect a crisper response to tabbing and scrolling, so the new Chrome browser memory system seems to work well, possibly even better than before.   I am not seeing the very occasional slow up/hang up any more when you got to clicking ahead of the browser loading something, either.

Dedicated sandbox memory has some side benefits, apparently.

It is 9:00 AM on Friday 1/5/18.

I just switched over to Win 10 to see what is needed download wise.

Got a list of 20 items, then a crash while downloading the first item.

Also lost one post written here on the list that I wrote while waiting for stuff to download, then it crashed before it could send itself to the list.

Win 10 sucks ......


Back on Linux again -- the MS arseholes on Win 10 were sending me pop up notices that my copy of Win 10 isn't "verified" again and the Win 10 stuff quite frankly doesn't work right for me any more --- I think when Mint 19 comes out I will do a rape and scrape and go back to Linux 100% permanently.

Windows 10 is just not worth the cost and the hassles, the constant downloading and installing of this and that update and the fall and spring upgrades and all the issues that crop up at update time and in between the seasonal "upgrades" are just plain driving me nuts.




10:00 AM back on Win 10 while trying to get it running right again.  Clock was messed up, as are Win 10 Update and Windows Defender settings.

Win 10 messes itself up, in other words .....   the cumulative effect of a long laundry list of upgrades generally breaks various things slowly to a degree that eventually breaks the system over time.


===================================


Note that more sold shares money has been found for stock that was sold by Intel's CEO ---- the total amount sold has increased, 29 million dollars is the current total being bounced around by reporters.  

If this is true, then the Intel CEO Krzanich may have him some potential legal share count issues to handle.    Remember, the limits imposed on him are stated in terms of SHARES he must continuously hold, not in dollar value.   Since the stock is tanking, he could easily buy on the open market any numbers of shares he needed to make back up to his correct count very easily (and make a quick buck doing it, which may have been his intention).

Also remember some of the shares he is holding may have been bought a lower dollar value (may be quite old) and as such the lesser amount of $$$$ value he retains may cover enough historically listed shares for him to still be legal.

Intel stock value has declined by 11 Billion Dollars since the bug news broke yesterday, while AMD stock value has increased by 6 Billion Dollars just this morning upon independent verification that AMD processors are really not affected by Meltdown to any real degree at all.    

The Spectre bug still affects all processors equally, but Spectre is a much less likely exploit and one that has not been detected in the wild yet.


==================================================


All modern processors are affected by Spectre, and more new versions of it are showing up daily.   Different Spectre versions count is up to four now .......

It becomes obvious that still more machines are being bought right now by people who accept going in they are buying inherently damaged goods with a very finite life span.

Folks will buy what is available, even knowing that they have a unit lifetime of Meltdown and Spectre to look forward to.   I list "Win 10 crap" right along with these bugs, since Win 10 itself causes me more issues than the bugs do considering that MS breaks itself intentionally periodically just so they can pick your pocket again.

I find this very sad that some folks have to live this way ......  wiping up after Intel and/or Microsoft grunts out a great big brand new brown snowball  .....      

 Hey Winboy, need some new underwear and a fresh wipe up here.  Need to pay up on your monthly fees, too.



Me, I'll stay here for free instead  (thank you so very much Linux Mint and special kudos to Google for the newly upgraded sandboxed Chrome Browser).

The issue resides inside the Intel processor itself, and no, all the fixes found so far do involve slowing down your machine to some degree.    You don't have to contact it, you got it already built in by Intel at the factory.  BUT you may not have some scuzzbag parked in there reading it constantly because you haven't got that portion yet through the internet.

The browser element involves some scuzzbag coming in by way of the internet to vacuum up your passwords and such that were temporarily left in a small internal to the INTEL chipset itself memory buffer (normally used to predict what data you need next and to preload it for rapid access) that the scuzzbag should never never never have had access to.

But, because Intel is stupid and lazy and MS likes to be able to re-write your machine each night, he does.

The fixes involve wiping this processor level memory clean (and all your normal buffers too) every 15-30 seconds and re-writing all your current data stuff fresh, time after time after time after time ...... forever putting a load on your processor and available memory.

Speaking of that fast memory that is used on top of all your modern hard drives as a speed thing, you do know it has a finite number of read/writes before it craps out on you, right?

Now you see why Google is working hard on Fuchsia OS and why Intel says they are completely leaving the x86 chipset structure for something brand new next year.

AMD did this last year as a cost reduction and is now kicking Intel's butt all over the place (AMD is a lot cheaper, too, as well as being Meltdown proof).

Microsoft is just twitching randomly at the moment as ARM chipsets running Win10 all have the Spectre issues too --- and that was MS's golden pathway to the future until just a few days ago.  

MS is really fading into the background as much as they can, jest a hoping the class action lawsuits continue to miss them ......

NOTE:  unless you use one of these antivirus programs, the latest MS patches can conflict with your off brand AV causing a blue screen lock-up.   Even these good ones require a current update to both the OS and to the AV to be installed before using them.

Vendors reported to have compatible updates are Symantec, F-Secure, Avast, and Microsoft's own Windows Defender platform

https://liliputing.com/2018/01/wait-meltdown-spectre-proof-cpus-buying-new-pc-ph
one.html

Should you wait for Meltdown & Spectre-proof CPUs before buying a new PC or phone?

Tough question.   You need to click and read the entire article as it lists pros and cons of each path of action.

Earlier this week the Computer Emergency Response Team Coordination Center (CERT/CC) issued a security note suggesting that in addition to applying software updates, a solution was to “replace CPU hardware” because “the underlying vulnerability is primarily caused by CPU architecture design choices. Fully removing the vulnerability requires replacing vulnerable hardware.”

Of course, complying with that suggestion would be difficult because there are no really good alternative CPUs (except AMD at the moment).   But CERT/CC has since changed its recommendation to say “operating system and some application updates mitigate these attacks.”

That’s likely due in part to updated information from chip makers, security researchers, and software developers.

The US-CERT site, however, still notes that while software updates will help, “the vulnerability exists in CPU architecture rather than in software,” so “patching may not fully address these vulnerabilities in all cases.”

AMD is considered proof against Meltdown at this time and AMD is as Spectre resistant as anything out there.   So if you must run go buy something go buy AMD, otherwise wait a year until corrected physical chip infrastructures and new OS products provide good security again.

Meltdown mitigation updates have either very little impact on performance on a personal PC… or a lot, depending on the task.    Individuals may possibly get off easy, but manyfold commercial uses will see some significant impacts.

Say it again, carefully ---- light single user uses, there can be light differences -- heavy users on heavy productive tasks, then some seriously heavy impacts can happen.  

Common grouped "conjoined user" Servers running Intel have the greatest risk of having critical bits plucked out of a shared cache and are the ones getting hit the worst performance-wise, enough so to possibly put a normal cloud services company out of business as the net change in processing costs to stop Meltdown can be greater than their current profit margin.



https://liliputing.com/2018/01/meltdown-mitigation-updates-either-little-impact-
performance-lot-depending-task.html




===================================================


https://www.jitbit.com/alexblog/270-cpu-usage-stats-after-patching-for-meltdown/




Google custom builds its own chipsets and Google is seeing very little effect (and their costs will not go up much accordingly).  

Folks who chose to use Intel (spent all that extra money) are now sitting impaled on a flag pole as far as rising costs are going to be going out into the future.

Look to see people who buy server processor services chose carefully to AVOID this issue, ASAP.


Intel is still fluttering and still has not accepted any responsibility for their sloppy design choices.


Also note that Intel apparently bases its knowledge of "slowdown" based only on several selected benchmark tests (which some say are partially ineffective/insensitive to the real use issues) vs the reporting server boys who have normal run load data going back for years and can state the changes quite accurately off of a normal workload given a few days to see the changes clearly.

Plus, Intel is supposedly basing what they say off of processor tweeks they haven't even released yet ..... so nobody really knows what they are talking about.

Intel should be very careful not to use any brown vapor, since they have teams of lawyers and lots of irate customers collecting every little bit of BS that they put out to use in court.