Intel/Linux 20% slowdown

[Keisha]

I have an AMD machine (A-series) that I can use, but for best security on that I'd have to shift away from my favourite Puppy distro to something with rolling updates to ensure all applications are Spectre-proofed, which would be a shame.

Or wait for a Puppy to appear with an appropriately patched kernel. The final mainline version of 4.16 should work, when it appears. Maybe, just maybe, 4.15. Or a legacy version kernel with the patchset backported.

That would solve Meltdown but not Spectre, which I believe requires recompilation of applications with 'retpoline' or similar mitigations..

But you said you use an AMD A CPU, which is not susceptible to the Spectre #2 attack which is mitigated by retpoline (see https://www.amd.com/en/corporate/speculative-execution). It only applies to Intel CPU's. Spectre #2 requires either retpoline patches to the kernel and software, or a microcode update (so says https://security.googleblog.com/2018/01 ... cpu_4.html). This implies that if you have the Intel microcode update in force, retpoline is unnecessary.

[8Geee]

I see a reference to the Intel Management Engine with Atom's being suseptible to THOSE things.

The Two Atom Series are;

C3xxx (Silvermont Architecture) AKA x3 series SoFIA
E39xx (Silvermont Archetecture) AKA x5 series Apollo Lake

So the Bonnell Architecture is EXEMPT.

Regards
8Geee

[ac2011]

[ac2011]

I see a reference to the Intel Management Engine with Atom's being suseptible to THOSE things.

The Two Atom Series are;

C3xxx (Silvermont Architecture) AKA x3 series SoFIA
E39xx (Silvermont Archetecture) AKA x5 series Apollo Lake

So the Bonnell Architecture is EXEMPT.

Regards
8Geee

Seems to be, hence the N280. It'll be fun going back a decade in computing power...

[8Geee]

There are some N2800 boxes around. These are 2-core Atoms using the Bonnell archetecture, and the last best processor that is EXEMPT from IME and Meltdown/Spectre.

Cheers
8Geee

[ac2011]

There are some N2800 boxes around. These are 2-core Atoms using the Bonnell archetecture, and the last best processor that is EXEMPT from IME and Meltdown/Spectre.

Cheers
8Geee

Thanks, but given it's a >2008 design I suspect it might have the Intel Management Engine, and that's a no-no for me. No point in jumping from one frying pan into another.

Edit: I know you wrote exempt from IME but do you have any links for that? Libreboot says anything from Intel after 2008 is compromised, and anything from 2013 onward for AMD, hence my 2012 AMD A-series box. The N2800 would be a better option than the N280 if it's IME-free.

[8Geee]

If the CPU is not Atom C3000 or E3900 there is NO Intel Management Engine. The 2008 reference is for desktop Nehalem CPU's. This is common FUD being sent all over.

Link to both Atom Processors and Intel OOOE was already given in one of my previous posts on topic. The source is Wikipedia.


As for Intel Management Engine look here. Skip the geeky stuff if you want, but there are important verified points about what is affected, and "other names" for it. You will find that the 2008 reference is for the Nehalem desktop. And you will also find that AMD distributed a patch for their version that shuts off that "feature" without harm. Intel's version bricks the computer.


Regards
8Geee

[ac2011]

If the CPU is not Atom C3000 or E3900 there is NO Intel Management Engine. The 2008 reference is for desktop Nehalem CPU's. This is common FUD being sent all over.

Regards
8Geee

Thanks (I think you wrote while I was editing). This sounds more appealing. My Google-fu apparently isn't good enough to find a definitive list of IME vs non-IME CPUs.

[8Geee]

me too, but uncle Barney Google has a nit to pik with competitors to Android and Chrome. se la vie.

Regards
8Geee

[rufwoof]

We should also be talking about what users can do to protect themselves. I think the following might help and/or provide some guide:

1) make sure you have 2-4 different bootable systems . System 1 is for general web use. System 2, a backup to System 1. System 3, a system with a browser that is used only for email and sensitive site access (that means going directly to those sites, and nowhere else). System 4, a backup to system 3.
.
.
4) In Systems 3 and 4 above, these systems are with browsers that have javascript enabled (most sensitive sites, i.e. bank, etc won't function without javascript enabled in the browser). Also, these systems are never to be booted up and used for anything else. Install basic minimums to this systems (Ubuntu minimal, or Debian minimal, and Puppy installs are great choices here. My preference: I build minimal Debian installs myself. Also, I trust Barry inside and out---and for a USB stick for a System 3/4 boot, these are the way to go.
.
.
7) Last but not least, in the Systems 3 and 4 that you build, or install and/or whatever, don't install any extra software packages---no new added programs for anything (except a browser, and, if building, only the basics for a DE functioning system). This shouldn't need explained, given what Systems 3 & 4 will be used for.

Great advice Belham2. I have Debian (main repo's only) for casual use (their security team are hot). For your 3/4 I use OpenBSD. Once installed already to a partition (a6 type), you can just download/verify the latest snapshot bsd.rd (usually under pub/OpenBSD/snapshots ... and your PC/device folder, /pub/OpenBSD/snapshots/amd64/bsd.rd for me) saving it to / and then boot that (reboot and enter "boot bsd.rd"). That 9MB or so ramdisk snapshot enables you to upgrade, install ...etc. I usually reinstall afresh and its all textual/cli style that takes around 5 minutes to run through (mostly its just accepting defaults and I use the http based install option so there's no need for CD's etc., just pulls down everything it needs). After a reboot I mount my Debian partition (for me running disklabel sd0 shows the ext3 partitions and for me its mkdir sda2;mount /dev/sd0j sda2 to mount the Debian partition) in which I have copies of the /etc/X11/xorg.conf, /etc/sysctrl.conf, ~/.Xdefaults ~/.xsession. ~/.twmrc and ~.profile that I copy over to the new OpenBSD install and then pkg_add (similar to Debian's apt-get) firefox-esr-i18n-en-GB and its all good to go.

Tracking openbsd --current conceptually isn't as stable as --release or --stable, but so far I've not encountered any problems and that has pre-built binaries of the latest versions so there's no need to compile anything. You can run into problems where the mirrors are being updated as you're pulling things down, but that's relatively rare (not encountered it myself, but have seen mention of it by others) and a simple re-try again later resolves that issue.

A fresh install of the latest versions of OpenBSD (which includes X that is set to run at a low-privilege levels) and browser used only to go directly to your banks web site is relatively secure. OpenBSD however doesn't have the range of programs as available from Debian, so as a day to day general system Debian works well for me. Nice to have a slice of both Linux and Unix pies as well.

[Keisha]

[ac2011]

Hmm...some further information which seems to challenge your conclusions:

Those were Google's conclusions, not mine. Again from the Google link about variant #1: "Mitigation requires analysis and recompilation so that vulnerable binary code is not emitted. Examples of targets which may require patching include the operating system and applications which execute untrusted code."

So either Google or Red Hat is wrong, since "applications which execute untrusted code" includes web browsers amongst other things, not just the kernel.

I hope Red Hat is right as I bought the AMD box specifically as an upgrade path free from IME. For now I'll use the Atom boxes until all the misunderstanding/misinformation about Meltdown and Spectre shakes itself out.

[s243a]

Hmm...some further information which seems to challenge your conclusions:

Those were Google's conclusions, not mine. Again from the Google link about variant #1: "Mitigation requires analysis and recompilation so that vulnerable binary code is not emitted. Examples of targets which may require patching include the operating system and applications which execute untrusted code."

So either Google or Red Hat is wrong, since "applications which execute untrusted code" includes web browsers amongst other things, not just the kernel.

I hope Red Hat is right as I bought the AMD box specifically as an upgrade path free from IME. For now I'll use the Atom boxes until all the misunderstanding/misinformation about Meltdown and Spectre shakes itself out.

This is speculation. A browser script might not have the necessary features to execute the attack. I presume the attack hasn't been demonstrated via a browser script or google wouldn't have made that claim.

Then again if the attacker could hijack the browser then maybe my assumptions are void.

[Keisha]

[Those were Google's conclusions, not mine...So either Google or Red Hat is wrong,...

Sorry for blaming the messenger. Yes, there is a stark contradiction implied there, isn't there...

Intel's shareholders probably will proceed with the legal actions which are already going forward, and those suits might ultimately combine and morph into some kind of class-action, which I presume Intel would settle out of court, with the shareholders getting new stock warrants perhaps. Maybe, just maybe, the individual buyers at retail of desktops and laptops with Intel inside will end up getting some type of small refund payout and/or rebate on their next Intel purchase.

However, my guess is, Amazon and Google and Microsoft and all the other rackmount server farm cloud providers etc. won't do anything drastic, e.g. won't become plaintiffs in giant lawsuits against Intel. After all, the cloud providers and Intel are mutually dependent on each other, and the Federal government would take any steps necessary to prevent Intel from being driven out of business, for reasons of national security.

Instead, my guess is, Dell and HP and the other hardware makers who supply the government and big cloud providers with large roomsful of rackmount hardware will quietly use public reaction to this fiasco as a bargaining chip to strike deals with Intel for future CPU's at reduced prices.

The cloud providers (including Google) will naturally attempt to bring pressure on Intel to compensate them for the higher electric bills needed to implement the Meltdown remedy, and for whatever damage to reputation and resultant loss of customer bases is due to the Spectre vulnerabilities of Intel CPU's.

If all this speculation above is on the mark, then the whitepapers by Google's Point Zero Team are not to be taken seriously, but are instead just a PR favor being done for Intel, a gesture of goodwill given by Google, an opening gambit of "noblesse oblige," in what promises to be an entertaining process of negotiation.

Or it could be that the whitepapers were in fact produced at the behest of Intel. Maybe it's decided to get rid of the AMT/SPS/ME ("IME") remote management technology altogether and is using this "disgrace" as a cover to initiate a new marketing campaign to sell everybody a forthcoming new generation of "less prone to government intrusion" CPU's?

Or maybe to ditch x86 and amd_64 altogether?

I hope Red Hat is right as I bought the AMD box specifically as an upgrade path free from IME. For now I'll use the Atom boxes until all the misunderstanding/misinformation about Meltdown and Spectre shakes itself out.

I just bought an Atom box too .

I've already convinced my boss to have the IT guy look at dual Epyc boxes.

Another possibility might be rumored forthcoming offerings from Lenovo based on Chinese-designed, Chinese-made CPU's built on MIPS64 architecture, which said architecture appears to be not subject to the OOOE type of attack --hmm, maybe there's a reason why China decided to license MIPS64 and develop its own CPU's...

I'll keep my dual-E5-2696v3-Xeon uber-spreadsheet-crusher though, until such time as Intel announces that no, it can't really come up with the promised new microcode update to prevent Spectre #2 attacks. If Intel throws in the towel on that one, or if the new microcode seriously slows my day-to-day processing down like the Meltdown #3 defense slows down high-transaction-volume datacenter database access...then Intel is history, and AMD (or Loongsong?) here I come

[rufwoof]

As the vulnerability is more widely known/understood, in the interim between browsers being patched (FF 57.4 I believe has been patched for AMD protection), using a addon such as useragent might be a reasonable choice in the interim and spoof your operating system/browser. At least that way if a potential exploit is being deployed against known systems/browsers it may misdirect/mitigate the risk.

[prehistoric]

As a person running an AMD processor at the moment, I'm going to offer a perspective on the relative risks. All the x86-compatible processors with speculative execution likely have similar vulnerabilities. AMD has implemented the same ideas in different ways, but many of these attacks have not been demonstrated on those processors. This is mainly because of Intel's market dominance. AMD has been less valuable as a target to attack.

It should be possible to correct this by changing kernels, though at present there hasn't been enough testing to know which offer a real improvement. In my view any mitigation that depends on changing applications is DOA (dead on arrival). Some people will do it, but many will not.

For the truly paranoid I will offer this question: how do you know what microcode, including loadable microcode used to fix this problem, is doing, or what it would be doing if attacked in some special way? How do you know what microcode your processor is running?

[Sky Aisling]

Does anyone know of a list or spreadsheet that shows machine make, model, year manufactured, CPU make and model, Kernels effected and other relevant data? A composite list?

Thank you in advance.

[Sailor Enceladus]

Does anyone know of a list or spreadsheet that shows machine make, model, year manufactured, CPU make and model, Kernels effected and other relevant data? A composite list?

Thank you in advance.

In the SA-00088 link in my post here, Intel writes the CPUs it believes/claims are affected:
http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic. ... 200#979200

It doesn't say Core2Duo or anything before that, from what I can see, which is kind of interesting.

[Sky Aisling]

https://xkcd.com/1938/

[Keisha]

Does anyone know of a list or spreadsheet that shows machine make, model, year manufactured, CPU make and model, Kernels effected and other relevant data? A composite list?

Thank you in advance.

AMD and Intel issued more-or-less simultaneous public releases today at about 3PM New York time. I happened to have CNBC on the TV and saw on the ticker the sudden rise in Intel stock and fall in AMD stock as a result of these announcements arriving about simultaneously.

Previously, I'd gathered that both AMD and Intel CPU's needed properly patched updated kernels. In addition, to fight Spectre #2, Intel needs updates to microcode. Today, Intel did publish a microcode update (https://downloadcenter.intel.com/downlo ... -Data-File). This update page lists applicable CPU's going all the way back to Celerons running on a 100 MHz front side bus.

Meanwhile, AMD issued an announcement (http://www.amd.com/en/corporate/speculative-execution) that, contrary to its initial announcements, it too would issue updates to its own microcode in order to defend against Spectre #2. AMD promised microcode updates for its current (Ryzen and Epyc) CPU's starting this week, and for earlier AMD CPU's in coming weeks.

So it looked like Intel was on the ball and AMD had been caught napping, and this resulted in their respective stock price spike or dip.

The Intel microcode update became available in the Ubuntu repositories soon after Intel released it. If you are running TahrPup, you can simply start Puppy Package Manager, click Configure Package Manager (the crossed wrench-and-screwdriver button), click the Update Database tab, click the Update Now button and press Enter as many times as it tells you to while it's wget'ing, to update the packages database to the current version. Then do a search in the main PPM screen for the package "intel-ucode" version 20180108 or newer, select it, and install it. Then reboot, you've got the new microcode. The directions for installing this microcode update to other operating systems are found in the unpacked microcode gunzip archive, in the file "releasenote". For example, instructions for Fedora are given at https://forums.fedoraforum.org/showthre ... -microcode.

The Intel webpage does not say whether or not this microcode update (when combined with a kernel update) is a complete, reliable solution to the two Spectre attacks, nor have performance comparisons been done yet before-and-after the new microcode update. So, optimism concerning Intel stock and pessimism concerning AMD stock may be premature!

Both brands of CPU are going to need kernel updates. Ubuntu images for these new kernels can be accessed through the links at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/SecurityTeam/Kn ... ndMeltdown. For example, the Ubuntu 14.04 (Trusty Tahr) kernel is at https://usn.ubuntu.com/usn/usn-3524-1/. Updating the Puppy kernels will of course require whatever measures are needed to adapt to Puppy, and to furnish the library modules and source code as well.