Windows Client Guidance against speculative execution vulnerabilities
-
Your first screenshot (before BIOS update) is indeed weird....(Protected and Enable Spectre Protection).
Now if you were not running InSpectre as Admin, pressing the button wouldn't have done anything.
On the other hand, Inspectre, is just software and might have bugs!!!
-
-
Sorry, when I said InSpectre told I'm good ... I actually meant that it said I was protected and that it showed
System is Spectre Protected YES, yet showed the
Enable Spectre Protection button, which If I clicked on it never actually did anything and made me question if I was actually protected. After the BIOS update it shows
System is Spectre Protected YES and the
Disable Spectre Protection Button.
Before BIOS Update
Attachment 182872
After BIOS Update
Attachment 182873
And come to think of it...since software bugs are only fixed when users report them, may I suggest that you take the time to send your two screenshots to the good folks at Gibson Research and let them know of this?
-
Your first screenshot (before BIOS update) is indeed weird....(Protected and Enable Spectre Protection).
Now if you were
not running InSpectre as Admin, pressing the button wouldn't have done anything.
On the other hand, Inspectre, is just software and might have bugs!!!
Yep, I ran it as Admin .... I'm guessing it was the cpumcupdate microcode patch and they way it's applied (ie. windows loading a driver) vs the BIOS update which I consider an actual microcode update :)
-
Hi,
Do you have a source on this?
I'll have took it up but that's just how it works and that's why a bios/efi MCU update is so much better as it is entirely OS independent and definite (unless you reflash the bios/efi of course).
Cheers, 
-
-
Yep, I ran it as Admin .... I'm guessing it was the cpumcupdate microcode patch and they way it's applied (ie. windows loading a driver) vs the BIOS update which I consider an actual microcode update :)
Ahaaa.... :) you were tricking poor old InSpectre!!!
I guess that is why you had it enabled. It sounds sensible!
-
Remember the MCU update is for mitigation only - i.e it alters SMBIOS - software (eg. drivers) can be circumvented... just saying (anyway as interesting as it is, it's a storm in a tea-cup IMHO)
-
-
I support a 3rd gen. Ivy Bridge (i5-3570k) & 4th gen. Haswell (i5 4670K) based PCs. The Intel guide above mentions only mobile processors related to Ivy Bridge & Haswell. I assume the desktop CPU fixes are being worked on but this isn't stated in the table for some reason.
-
I support a 3rd gen. Ivy Bridge (i5-3570k) & 4th gen. Haswell (i5 4670K) based PCs. The Intel guide above mentions only mobile processors related to Ivy Bridge & Haswell. I assume the desktop CPU fixes are being worked on but this isn't stated in the table for some reason.
If Intel were working on microcode updates for desktop Ivy Bridge and Haswell processors, you would think it would be stated in the guidance. What makes the omission even more strange is the fact that Intel has released microcode updates for first and second generation desktop Core processors.
-
-
If Intel were working on microcode updates for desktop Ivy Bridge and Haswell processors, you would think it would be stated in the guidance. What makes the omission even more strange is the fact that Intel has released microcode updates for first and second generation desktop Core processors.
The microcode is update for Bloomfield?
Quote
