The questions are incredibly weak from the interviewers. They first state that it's not practical because the attack could take many hours, even days. But they don't describe why a day-long attack is not practical.
They then bring the researchers and ask them the same question. The researchers say that the attack is very practical because it only takes.. a few hours or days to execute the attack. Here's the specific part: https://youtu.be/BiRPr839dSU?t=1476
Instead of chatting more about this discrepancy they just ignore it and ask the researches how they feel about their new popularity.
From what I can tell from the advisory from Intel, it's simply that people should understand the attack and mitigate it in software. It's very vague. The specifics (i.e. a list of example popular programs that are vulnerable) seem entirely missing.
Here's a video from Intel chatting with the researchers: https://community.intel.com/t5/Blogs/Products-and-Solutions/...
The questions are incredibly weak from the interviewers. They first state that it's not practical because the attack could take many hours, even days. But they don't describe why a day-long attack is not practical.
They then bring the researchers and ask them the same question. The researchers say that the attack is very practical because it only takes.. a few hours or days to execute the attack. Here's the specific part: https://youtu.be/BiRPr839dSU?t=1476
Instead of chatting more about this discrepancy they just ignore it and ask the researches how they feel about their new popularity.
From what I can tell from the advisory from Intel, it's simply that people should understand the attack and mitigate it in software. It's very vague. The specifics (i.e. a list of example popular programs that are vulnerable) seem entirely missing.