> In message <v6affa9bli.fsf@kechara.flame.org>, Michael Graff writes:
> >Andrew Gillham <gillhaa@ghost.whirlpool.com> writes:
> >
> >> If their patch just looks through the code for '0xf0, 0x0f, 0xc7, 0xc8' 
> >> when exec()'ing, then what stops the malicious from reassembling the
> >> sequence at runtime?
> >
> >I really don't see how a software workaround is plausable for this sort
> >of bug.
> 
> It's a microcode upgrade.  SCO has a fix now, as well.
> 
>   ftp://ftp.sco.com/SLS/ptf3343.txt

Huh?

Did you actually read that file?  It says _nothing_ about Pentiums.
Pentium Pros, yes.  Pentium IIs, yes.  Pentiums, no.


cgd