this post was submitted on 12 Nov 2024
120 points (99.2% liked)

Linux

48157 readers
614 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
top 20 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 day ago

How about a Linux Patch that reports binary blobs wirh no source AS __ Security Vulnerabilities __

Or are we not allowed to criticize the back doors that hackers gain access to.

[–] [email protected] 27 points 2 days ago (4 children)

The real thing is: can you update the microcode of older CPUs? If not then it's a marketing strategy.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 day ago

It sounds like the criterion is "is newer microcode available". So it doesn't look like a marketing strategy to sell new CPUs.

[–] [email protected] 22 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

I mean, it’s still good to know if you’re vulnerable right (for sake of discussion)?

[–] [email protected] 11 points 2 days ago

@GolfNovemberUniform @captainkangaroo Yes and Linux includes software to do this.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 day ago

The article does specify that it would report if the newest version of the firmware for the CPU family is not installed, so it doesn't seem like this is that particular kind of BS.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 2 days ago

Microcode would not be a concern with that particular CPU.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago

So the patch is just copying the existing warning to a standard location?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago (3 children)

The Linux kernel would maintain a list of the latest Intel microcode versions for each CPU family, which is based on the data from the Intel microcode GitHub repository. In turn this list would need to be kept updated with new Linux kernel releases and as Intel pushes out new CPU microcode files.

Sounds like that would be outdated for everyone without a rolling distro.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago)

Sounds like a user space application, there's no place for this in the kernel. So would you need to upgrade kennel and reboot to update the list? Nonsense.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 19 hours ago

Yeah, methinks this will be one of those alerts pretty much everyone will be like "yeah, yeah, I know" and click to silence those notifications.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 day ago

Stable distros can and will backport security fixes. Good ones that is.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 days ago (1 children)

How does it know if the microcode is outdated?

[–] [email protected] 15 points 2 days ago (3 children)

@ryannathans @captainkangaroo I'm going to make the wild assumption that the kernel will have a table of the current microcode versions at the time of it's release, but I doubt that
will get updated except by kernel upgrades.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Debian-based distros (and probably most othera as well) actually have a package called "intel-microcode" which gets updated fairly regularly.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago

@DaPorkchop_ Oddly, if you build your own kernel and remove the system provided one, the package gets automatically removed as well which is weird, because it is really still needed regardless.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

If that's the case, why wouldn't they put the microcode in the kernel?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

@ryannathans Why bloat the kernel with the microcode for every intel processor that might need it (and there is a similar thing for AMD) when you don't have that specific processor? It does make more sense for it to be a separate, especially on memory constrained systems. I mean if you've got 256GB of RAM probably not a big deal but if you've got 256MB a big deal.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

The kernel compilation is already configurable between megabytes and gigabyte+

Distros pick their featureset

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 days ago

There's probably an efivar that reads the current microcode version.