All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
Intel will not release a Spectre patch for these processors.
no update to fix Spectre design flaw on the Intel CPU's listed below... So what is everyone's plans? Continue to run known insecure chips, or upgrade to AMD EyPC and enjoy the big core and nvme raid abilities 
Intel® Core Processor Extreme Edition i7-975
Intel® Core Processor i7-920, 930, 950, 960
Intel® Core Processor Extreme Edition i7-965
Intel® Core Processor i7-920, 940
Intel® Xeon® Processor W3520, W3530, W3540, W3550, W3565, W3570, W3580
Intel® Core Extreme Processor i7-920XM, 940XM
Intel® Core Processor i7-720QM, 740QM, 820QM, 840QM
Intel® Core i7-970, 980
Intel® Core Processor Extreme Edition i7-980X, 990X
Intel® Xeon® Processor W3690
Intel® Xeon® Processor L5408, L5410, L5420
Intel® Xeon® Processor E5405,E5410,E5420,E5430, E5440, E5450, E5462, E5472
Intel® Xeon® Processor X5450, X5460, X5470, X5472, X5482
Intel® Xeon® Processor L5408, L5410, L5420, L5430
Intel® Xeon® Processor E5405,E5410,E5420,E5430, E5440, E5450, E5462, E5472
Intel® Xeon® Processor X5450, X5460, X5470, X5492
Intel® Celeron® Processor P1053
Intel® Xeon® Processor EC3528, EC3529, EC5509, EC5539, EC5549, LC3518, LC3528, LC5518, LC5528
Intel® Core2 Extreme Processor X9000, X9100
Intel® Core2 Quad Processor Q9000, Q9100
Intel® Core2 Duo Processor T6400, T6500, T6670, T8100, T8300, T9300, T9400, T9500, T9550, T9600, T9800, T9900, SU9300, SU9400, SU9600, SP9300, SP9400, SP9600, SL9380, SL9400, SL9600, SL9300, P7350, P7370, P7450, P7550, P7570, P8400, P8600, P8700, P8800, P9500, P9600, P9700
Intel® Core2 Solo Processor SU3500, ULV SU3500, ULV SU3300
Intel® Pentium® Processor T4200, T4300, T4400, T4500
Intel® Celeron® Processor 900, 925, SU2300, T3100, T3300, T3500, ULV 763
Intel® Celeron® M Processor ULV 722, ULV 723, ULV 743
Intel® Atom® Processor x3-C3200RK, x3-C3230RK
Intel® Core 2 Duo Processor E7200, E7300, E8190, E8200, E8300, E8400, E8500
Intel® Core 2 Duo Processor E7400, E7500, E8400, E8500, E8600
Intel® Pentium® Processor E5200, E5300, E5400, E5500, E5700, E5800, E6300, E6500, E6500K, E6600, E6700, E6800
Intel® Celeron® Processor E3200, E3300, E3400, E3500
Intel® Xeon® Processor E3110, E5205, E5220, L5240, X5260, X5272
Intel® Xeon® Processor E3110, E3120, E5205, E5220, L3110, L5215, L5240, X5260, X5270, X5272
Intel® Core2 Extreme Processor QX9650, QX9770, QX9775
Intel® Core2 Quad Processor Q8200, Q8200S, Q8400, Q8400S, Q9300, Q9400, Q9400S, Q9450, Q9500, Q9505, Q9505S, Q9550, Q9550S, Q9650
Intel® Xeon® Processor L3360, X3320, X3330, X3350, X3360, X3370, X3380
Comments
AMD master race
It was expected. These are archaic CPUs. We have a handful of those already and every month we retire 1 or 2 at least. You can’t expect the kit to be supported forever.
True from a certain perspective, though there are many consumer desktops/laptops still in use that have one of those CPUs (I have two myself).
I guess that the situation is less severe if the OS has been patched to mitigate Spectre. (I assume that the OP meant to say "Spectre" as opposed to "Spectrum" in the title.)
I thought the core2 duo and core2 quad do not support speculative execution anyway, so should not need any "patching".
im fine, Pentium III running just fine.
at least laptop that already use 7th-8th gen got update.
To be fair, Spectre and Meltdown only affects people running untrusted code from the public - i.e. Hosting Providers.
The majority of these processors that's probably installed in industrial applications won't really see people trying to leak data off of them using Spectre or Meltdown since a good chunk of them aren't even connected to the Internet, or much less even have the opportunity to run untrusted code on them.
10+ years old CPU.
I don't care. I do admit I own some of them listed up there but they aren't online anyway.
That's not true. There are plenty of organizations that still use these old CPUs ie. small businesses like dental offices etc. Much of this old legacy shit won't run on newer OSes. Intel sold hardware that was defective and is refusing to patch them.
OS patches.. will be slower but at least they will work.
To be fair, a tech company can't be expected to support a product ad eternum.
It can if there's an exploit that therefore entirely makes the product useless in any serious environment lol..
The only half decent thing would be to fix the product. Its not a typical case of long term product support.
The products were not rendered useless, as the systems still run.
As for running new OS's, and whatnot, the CPU were made to fit the requirements of their time, not a "buy this cpu and you're set for life scenario".
The people managing the "serious environments" you speak off need to take all this into account, plus the fact that service, support, is a product in itself. And as all products, it's not unlimited
Yeah, I can't agree with a critical exploit being unpatched just because it's old.
We're not talking about some scrappy startup here that can barely afford the dev team continuing the existing product.
They can afford a literal team designated to solely fixing their fuck up, and it's what they should do, if they don't, it's gonna tarnish the brand.
Fuck ups happen, it's how you handle them that counts.
There are plenty of machines still running those CPUs, that I agree, but they won't likely be online as in connected to the internet. At best, those will likely be on intranet.
The safest machine is those that aren't online anyway.
Not because its old, but because its no longer supported. That doesn't always equate to old. (well, I guess "old" is subjective
)
I'm not saying it wouldn't have been nice of them to provide such a patch, it would, people would appreciate it. But I also guess that the balance between resources needed to accomplish it Vs how much people would have appreciated it, just wasn't there.
Also.. here is Intel excuse..
https://www.theverge.com/2018/4/4/17198322/intel-spectre-patch-update-fix
Yes, most aren't online. But this doesn't mean they should be left unpatched. This is Intel, at the very least say "hey, let us give you 50% off with this partnership with Dell/HP/etc" but nope, you're just SOL.
If you're a serious business running this hardware then the hardware has been long paid for and the cost of upgrading should be negligable. We're not talking about a $10,000 upgrade here, drop a few hundred dollars to get something with a warranty and is supported if it's so crucial for your business.
Nah. If anything, the store they initially purchased it from should cover, not Intel. If they are under warranty, they should be the ones replacing such units that have CPUs that will be patched.
If they are under warranty, that is, and the purchaser specifically ask for it. Those who are using these ancient machines, they won't want to replace them because they work as they should.
I mean, it could be a few grand. And lots of times these management systems that are only used internally for scheduling etc run on Windows XP. I'm sure there is newer software available, but it could be another few thousand for new licenses for something that works fine. Even though these systems aren't online so they're not really at risk, it's not really right in my opinion that a multibillion dollar company such as Intel with thousands and thousands of employees won't spend a little time and patch these remaining processors. It's like when mid 2000s Honda's were having blown transmissions due to faulty design, Honda recalled 600k cars and fixed them even though they were out of warranty. It's not about legality, it's about doing whats right and standing by your customers if there is a problem.
I didn't see 386DX in the list. I'm good.
They have bigger problems than a CPU exploit. LoL
Windows 98 master race
Edit: But honestly, on a serious note I am an AMD fanboy honestly anyways.
What happens next time a hardware problem is found? Will Intel fix it then?
Hopefully not. If Intel is wasting resources on old hardware then I'd be pissed as a paying client. Seriously, if a business can't spend $500 on supported hardware to patch security exploits then they need to rethink their business plan completely.
you are minimizing an issue. It's not about $500, it's about principal. Intel fucked up. And they need to fix it. Also, the $500 is not anywhere an accurate number, when you add up multiple systems and licensing and implementation cost it could be $10k+ that a small business doesn't necessarily have laying around.
I got a question.. on my server at hetzner. Will the provider install these Intel patches or am I responsible to do it on my own?
If you find a bug in software that's 25 years old and unsupported is the developer expected to patch it? No. The same goes with hardware and anything else. There is a reason why companies make products EOL and it makes sense. They were nice enough to patch Nehalem CPUs that went EOL last year but people are upset that they don't patch something from 8 years ago?
And the $500 cost was for each machine. Licenses can be moved over to new hardware, it's not hard and even licenses that are bound to hardware IDs can be moved over with a phone call. If their business is important to them then having a budget or being able to finance an upgrade from hardware that's almost a decade old should be a priority at this point. If the business is only making $10 a month then they could simply unplug the hardware from the network and they just saved themselves some money.