ECC is at best a temporary workaround, and at worst an implicit approval of the creation of defective products. It's purpose is to prevent transient bitflips due to cosmic rays and such, not consistently reproducible errors from what is otherwise perfectly normal operation.
Plus you can detect attack attempts as the memory controller will report increased error rates.
Now you've turned specific access patterns into "attack attempts", and by discriminating against them as such, entirely destroyed a fundamental part of general-purpose computing. What's next, CPUs that are only guaranteed to do certain operations correctly, and everything else is considered an "attack"? That is NOT a direction that we should be heading. Hell fucking no!!!
RAM should always hold what was last written to it, under all conditions of software accesses. To expect or imply that anything less is acceptable, is to destroy one of the foundations on which general-purpose computing is built.
NAND Flash
Where manufacturers are trying to sell 2-4x the capacity with 1/4 to 1/16th of the endurance? That's a rant for another thread...
We know how to solve this problem.
This problem didn't exist 15 years ago. It only got created because the RAM companies have forsaken correctness, and somehow managed to convince everyone else that it's not their own fault.
Plus you can detect attack attempts as the memory controller will report increased error rates.
Now you've turned specific access patterns into "attack attempts", and by discriminating against them as such, entirely destroyed a fundamental part of general-purpose computing. What's next, CPUs that are only guaranteed to do certain operations correctly, and everything else is considered an "attack"? That is NOT a direction that we should be heading. Hell fucking no!!!
RAM should always hold what was last written to it, under all conditions of software accesses. To expect or imply that anything less is acceptable, is to destroy one of the foundations on which general-purpose computing is built.
NAND Flash
Where manufacturers are trying to sell 2-4x the capacity with 1/4 to 1/16th of the endurance? That's a rant for another thread...
We know how to solve this problem.
This problem didn't exist 15 years ago. It only got created because the RAM companies have forsaken correctness, and somehow managed to convince everyone else that it's not their own fault.