Here we are - 3600 which was still under manufacture 2-3 years ago are not get patched. Shame on you AMD, if it is true.

    • Auli@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      Just because a store is still selling their stock doesn’t mean AND is still making them and selling them.

    • Victor@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      7 months ago

      Ryzen 3000 series CPUs are still sold as new

      Ah, that changes things. Not great. But still,

      uninfected systems will intentionally be left vulnerable

      what I meant was that apparently only compromised systems are vulnerable to this defect.

        • Victor@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          What I meant was exactly that, which you corroborated as correct. You’d first have to already compromise these systems, in order to be able to exploit this vulnerability. That’s as I understood it. It’s that correct?

          Gosh, it’s not easy getting my point across here today, I’m sorry.

          All I’m saying is that I don’t think AMD is doing this to us, on purpose. I think it’s just happened, and they’re not handling it very well, even though it’s somewhat understandable. At least to me. 🤷‍♂️

          But then again, I have no reason to be attacked or have my system compromised, so my situation is better than others’, perhaps.

            • Victor@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              7 months ago

              they could just as well choose to help them.

              I think that’s what I have a hard time believing. If they could “just as well” help, it is my belief that they also would. Because I don’t think they’re morons. I think they know this hurts their reputation. There has to be some obstacle, be it financial or lack of man power or… something. That is my belief.

              Don’t you (all) think that sounds more likely than them just leaving their customers in the dark for no other reason than not having to do work?

                • Victor@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  7 months ago

                  I mean… 🤷‍♂️ The analysis is made, decision made. I probably have an affected system but… What’s the real risk for private end users? Should I really be so concerned?