• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Should owners of processors affected by security problems receive compensation?

Should owners of processors affected by security problems receive compensation?

  • Accept returns for the original price

    Votes: 1,929 18.5%

  • A percentage equal to the performance lost

    Votes: 1,169 11.2%

  • Fixed compensation in the 10% range

    Votes: 411 3.9%

  • Offer free replacements

    Votes: 2,173 20.8%

  • Get a discount on the next-generation CPU

    Votes: 2,209 21.2%

  • Not as long as fixes are provided

    Votes: 2,535 24.3%
  • Total voters
    10,426
  • Poll closed .
lexluthermiester said:
Simple, I've had dealings with the civil legal system. Experience and knowledge of case law.

You would have to prove Intel was a party to the damage done, either by negligence or by willful action. Neither applies.

But that is the point I was trying to make above. Meltdown is effectively patched and solved. No longer a serious problem. Spectre affects ALL CPU's, not just AMD, Intel, etc., etc.

That is not the way it works. Meltdown and Spectre are not design defects or flaws. They are vulnerabilities that can exploit the normal functionality of the hardware in question. As such any claim against a company would need to be backed up by evidence that some form of negligence or willful act was taken by the company in question in regards to the the act of attack. That has not happened and is very unlikely as the vulnerabilities that are difficult to patch have been around for 25 years and have no known exploits. The defense attorneys will argue that because they have been around for so long and were unforeseen, they are not liable. They could argue statues of limitations, which has worked in past cases, or they could argue that they did not carry out the attack, nor could reasonably prevent it. There are mountains of arguments that could be used as a valid defense.

No company is going to offer refunds, credits, discounts or anything like that. Not the way the world works, and for good reason.
Click to expand...
OMG are you trying to litigate Hypothetical scenarios with a layman? ? LMFAO! And some how I feel you are wrong I have sued in civil court and proof is all you need and IF proof exist then case closed!
 
As far as I can see Intel wasn't privy to the vulnerability until the end of last year by which time it was far to late to put a stop on anything being released. They have tried to mitigate it by putting out patches and have been forthcoming about the problem as for older CPU's that have the vulnerability I don't see this as a intel problem they didn't know when baking the silicon that there was a problem but unfortunately it does affect every CPU of Intels from Core 2 through to todays releases so no I don't think any sort of compo should be paid out but the next release should also not contain the vulnerability either
 
Show me the money!
 
lexluthermiester said:
Ok

Like Small Claims? Burden of proof is a bit different in a municipal or county court VS a Federal court.
Click to expand...
Wouldn't be a Federal case if it is a citizen taking them to task!
 
See again this is really a non issue to be honest, No one has been or ever will be affected by this flaw if so there would have been some kind of reaction from some one, It's a non issue for 100% of the customers. You can argue that now.
So really this so called flaw is;
1: Moot
2:Non-sequitur
3: over for me.
Peace out! :peace:
 
the scare-mongering that puts everyone on their heels are overrated IMO. If it doesn't affect you in any way, I don't see a solid reason to go out & buy a Ryzen chip + AM4 board just because Intel admitted their whole lineup is affected by 2 vulnerabilities that just got discovered.
 
I think (if possible) they need to wait with presenting a new type of processor and make new versions of the 1150 1151 1155 etc. sockets whi h do not have these flaws. And revise their design from scratch to make sure that no further flaws can be found. This way you are not forced to buy a new pc or new motherboard (for DIY).
 
The socket isn;t the issue though, its the CPU itself. They will not go back on an architectural level and fix this for old CPUs. Its microcode and OS.. that's its. Moving forward it will be addressed... for example, With Zen+ AMD is implementing a microcode fix. However, since Zen2 is taped out yet, they mentioned they will make architectural changes in it.
 
I have still not had a fix for win 10 (64 bit). It keeps installing then de-installing everyday. What most if not all users has failed to see what is happening, my write cycle of my 850 Pro has gone up from 12.5TB written to 12.7TB written & is still rising, because I still don't have any update.

I have repeated install/uninstall everyday & it sometimes happening twice in one day.

The good news win 7 (64 bit) is fixed as I had a problem here too on my other computer.

So, am I due compensation for reducing the life span of my SSD.
 
Last edited:
lexluthermiester said:
Where are you getting those numbers? That's a gross over-exaggeration of the effect the patches have on performance...

It's a software patch that causes the effect on performance, not a problem with the hardware itself. Not a defect/flaw. A vulnerability.
Click to expand...

False. Enterprise customers can expect exactly the loss he described. Do you know any server guys in fortune 500s? I do. A big Gray one took 23% hit on their virtuals. 90% of their servers are VMs. I'd sure hate to have the workloads that have 30%+ impact... I'd be livid.

And..false, again. If a chip needs a software patch that eats performance to fix, then it is a BIG flaw. I guess the old phenom TLB bug wasn't a flaw, either. Just because the flaw doesn't output incorrect data doesn't mean it's not a flaw. It's a security flaw.
 
Last edited:
TheGuruStud said:
I'd sure hate to have the workloads that have 30%+ impact... I'd be livid.
Click to expand...
Like crying over spilled milk. It wasn't an intentional vulnerability. That's life.
TheGuruStud said:
And..false, again. If a chip needs a software patch that eats performance to fix, then it is a BIG flaw.
Click to expand...
Incorrect. That describes a vulnerability, not a flaw.
TheGuruStud said:
I guess the old phenom TLB bug wasn't a flaw, either.
Click to expand...
Yes, that is a flaw. It is a defect in how the CPU functions.
TheGuruStud said:
Just because the flaw doesn't output incorrect data doesn't mean it's not a flaw. It's a security flaw.
Click to expand...
Again, you are describing a vulnerability, not a flaw.
(feeling like a broken record)
 
lexluthermiester said:
Like crying over spilled milk. It wasn't an intentional vulnerability. That's life.

Incorrect. That describes a vulnerability, not a flaw.

Yes, that is a flaw. It is a defect in how the CPU functions.

Again, you are describing a vulnerability, not a flaw.
(feeling like a broken record)
Click to expand...
 
well seems like the IT industy is the only one where such a "problem" will not lead to any problems for the manufacturer... imagine creating a flawed product in the first place you get destroyed for every litte cumble

not for this :-/
 
People who actually get affected, as in people have their security breached should get way more compensation than just the cost of a CPU.

For everyone else, if there is no performance penalties and fixes are provided in a timely fashion, there should be no need for compensation. If there is performance penalties, there should be full or partial refunds available depending on how severe the problem is.

Nothing is bug free and it is impossible to hold any company responsible to all problems but when problems do arise, there should be a appropriate response to the issue in a timely fashion.
 
Not sure if I am considered dumb for buying the 8700k or not after I knew about this issue, but the $329 free ship no tax offer from Monoprice was too hard to beat, and $99 MSI Z370 SLI Plus (competes with $300 boards)... just yeah very lovely prices... I'm just gamer guy, don't really do anything else, don't even know how to run a VM, so I don't think any of this matters to me, minus maybe like a 1-2% performance hit which I consider negligible since I am at 5ghz anyway. Am I right in assuming I made the right move considering the prices I paid? Or should I consider refunding since I am still within 30 day frame?
 
I believe we should no get compensation as when you buy hardware its at your own risk and when you make profits they don't get a piece of that and when they find vulnerabilities and work to patch it we don't normally receive compensation and so why should that change? Buying tech we know there is a risk for flaws and when we buy tech there's a nonverbal agreement that any such vulnerabilities would be attempted to be addressed and so this is part of the cycle.

We wanted convenience and bragged and bragged about having it and now people want to jump ship after seeing what it cost them. Wait for a solution as with any flaw and hope they find a way to keep sensitive information out of reach.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top