Consumer usage is not really concerned by the attack scenario of this vulnerability from what I understand. The prerequisite is to have access to the bios so it’s already game over at this point.
Consumer usage is not really concerned by the attack scenario of this vulnerability from what I understand. The prerequisite is to have access to the bios so it’s already game over at this point.
A negative price is absurd and has no physical reality, it is the result of speculation and abstract rules not grounded on reality. It always costs to build and operate whatever power source and networks were involved, you don’t have to pay electricity to f*ck off if you produce too much of it.
They are bad at writing software and firmware support is sketchy. That second point is technically the motherboard vendors fault but it could be due to confusing design and documentation on the AMD side. Hardware-wise they are great AFAIK.
I believe they used carbide lamps and not oil lamps.
Agreed, firmware security by chip manufacturers has been underwhelming to say the least and we can blame them for that. But in this specific instance I still don’t see the benefit of a fix for consumer usage. Companies have a responsibility and accountability toward their users, so a fix is due, for personal laptops/PCs the threat is toward the owners themselves (activists, diplomats, journalists, etc.). The latter do not buy second hand equipment, and if the firmware is compromised while they own it, they are already in danger.