Meltdown & Spectre the last Opera 68.0.3618.104 vulnerability

[anastasia-mx]

anastasia-mx @donq last edited by

@donq the system is new, all patches are worth it. I’m just using another Firefox browser - everything is fine with me, there is no vulnerability.

[donq]

donq @anastasia-mx last edited by donq

@anastasia-mx
What offline scanner says? https://www.grc.com/inspectre.htm

For my PC/OS it says so, thereby Opera reporting same is no wonder:

There are more tools listed: https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/1353430-inspectre-grccom-spectre-meltdown-testing-tool/

[burnout426]

burnout426 Volunteer last edited by burnout426

For me, with 2nd-gen Intel Core i5, https://xlab.tencent.com/special/spectre/spectre_check.html says I'm vulnerable to Spectre in all browsers except Firefox. All the other browsers I tested are Chromium-based. I tested in Opera 67 and 66 too. They show the same thing.

With https://www.grc.com/inspectre.htm, it says I'm protected for both Meltdown and Spectre. It says a microcode update is available. Performance is "Slower" due to the workarounds.

I'm on Windows 10 OS Version 1909 (Build 18363.836).

[andrew84]

andrew84 last edited by andrew84

O58 - 58.0.3135.132 (I don't see 'processing cache' for some reason)

68.0.3618.104
random result (when I click 'recheck'), sometimes it checks only few caches (8, 16, 32), sometimes checks all caches until 128. When it includes all caches including 128 it shows NOT vulnerable. if less caches were checked, then it shows vulnerable. Win 8.1 3rd gen core i3.

[leocg]

leocg Moderator Volunteer @anastasia-mx last edited by

@anastasia-mx What about other Chromium based browsers?

[andrew84]

andrew84 last edited by andrew84

I have the same in latest MS Edge build (Canary), if 128 cache was scanned, then all is fine.

[anastasia-mx]

anastasia-mx @leocg last edited by

@leocg said in & Spectre the last Opera 68.0.3618.104 vulnerability:

Did you check with a clean profile?

if you delete all the settings, it will be very bad and I will need to configure a lot from the beginning

@donq said in & Spectre the last Opera 68.0.3618.104 vulnerability:

What offline scanner says? https://www.grc.com/inspectre.htm

Meltdown & Spectre - NO!, NO! updates strongly slow down the system, I do not want to put them, I have hope for the browser itself.

@leocg said in & Spectre the last Opera 68.0.3618.104 vulnerability:

What about other Chromium based browsers?

not used by others Chromium based browsers. I only use Mozilla - everything is fine in it, there is no vulnerability.

any other sites to check for vulnerabilities?

[leocg]

leocg Moderator Volunteer @anastasia-mx last edited by

@anastasia-mx Since Opera is a Chromium based browser, you need to also check with other Chromium based browsers to have a valid comparasion.

[leocg]

leocg Moderator Volunteer @anastasia-mx last edited by

@anastasia-mx A clean profile would help checking if the problem is not being caused by a broken profile.

[donq]

donq last edited by

IIRC at least some (theoretical) browser attacks were based on precision timing in javascript and mitigation was done by randomizing JS timing errors - all such behavior is seated deep inside JS engine and should not be related to broken profile. Well, there likely are some JS flags, which may alter engine behavior - and you may search or ask on chrome/chromium forums, have they changed anything related to spectre or JS timings.

I have not heard about (widespread) real-word exploits, based on spectre (or meltdown). I would think such kind of vulnerabilites can be used for targeted attaks, where every bit of information can be valuable; for generic attakcs (to take PC over) this is a bit hard and unpredictable to use - of course I may be wrong here.

[A Former User]

A Former User last edited by

I found a blog comment from the Opera developers. https://blogs.opera.com/desktop/2018/01/opera-50-0-2762-67-stable-update/

[leocg]

leocg Moderator Volunteer @Guest last edited by

@johnd78 You posted the link to the blog post and not to the comment.

[andrew84]

andrew84 @leocg last edited by

@leocg so read the blog post, there's an explanation. And there's 0 comments (because all the 'disqus' comments were removed)

[A Former User]

A Former User @leocg last edited by

@leocg I meant the developers' blog comments on this issue. As far as I remember, when a problem with this vulnerability appeared, the developers forcedly disabled opera://flags/#shared-array-buffer flag. Now this flag is gone.

[A Former User]

A Former User @andrew84 last edited by A Former User

@andrew84 Please, try enabling the flag opera://flags/#shared-array-buffer in the 58th Opera. It is interesting to look at the test result on your system.

[andrew84]

andrew84 @Guest last edited by andrew84

@johnd78 with the enabled flag I have the same random result in O58 too, depending oh how many 'caches' were processed.

[A Former User]

A Former User @andrew84 last edited by

@andrew84 Ok, got it. Then try to disable the flag opera://flags/#enable-webassembly-threads in the 68th Opera. To pass the test, this should be enough.

[andrew84]

andrew84 @Guest last edited by andrew84

@johnd78 said in Meltdown & Spectre the last Opera 68.0.3618.104 vulnerability:

opera://flags/#enable-webassembly-threads

I disabled it, but in my case the result is still random (Portable 68.0.3618.104)

[A Former User]

A Former User @andrew84 last edited by

@andrew84 For me with the opera://flags/#enable-webassembly-threads flag Disabled in the 68th it turns out like with the opera://flags/#shared-array-buffer flag Disabled in the 58th.

[andrew84]

andrew84 @Guest last edited by andrew84

@johnd78 I can't comment here, I also tried it in 69 (which is not portable) and all is the same.
.

Maybe the test itself is not stable. And my processors can't be called as 'modern' like it is said in the blog post's explanation.