Skip to content
Tech News
← Back to articles

Following user outcry, AMD reinstates memory encryption in consumer CPUs

read original more articles
Why This Matters

AMD's decision to reintroduce memory encryption (TSME) in consumer CPUs highlights the importance of security features in protecting user data, especially against physical attacks. The backlash from users underscores the significance of transparency and user trust in hardware security decisions, influencing industry standards and consumer confidence.

Key Takeaways

Consumer AMD CPUs will once again offer encryption protections against physical attacks after facing user backlash for silently removing the feature.

As Ars reported last week, AMD stripped the protection, known as TSME, from consumer Ryzen processors. Short for Transparent Secure Memory Encryption, TSME encrypts the entire contents stored in memory, making the data useless to adversaries performing cold boot attacks and similar intrusions requiring physical access.

Now you see it, now you don’t, soon you’ll see it again

About a decade ago, AMD added TSME to its high-end CPUs. Over the next few years, AMD added the protection to lower-end processors, including the consumer version of its Ryzen chips, a CPU that costs less than the Pro version. Over the years, users of these lower-end chips have gotten used to the added security, although some security experts (and plenty of novices, too) note that consumer chips are far less likely to be targeted by physical attacks. Recently and without warning or notice, the lower-end line of AMD chips suddenly dropped the protection, and it did so in a way that was impossible to detect on Windows machines and required a fair amount of technical work when using Linux. AMD last week declined to explain or acknowledge the change.

Following the revelation, social media was deluged by comments from AMD consumers decrying the move. They noted that AMD’s quiet removal of TSME after supporting it for so long seemed underhanded. The move came solely as a result of firmware changes made in a recent update. With no physical changes required to silicon, continued support was largely, if not purely, a matter of will rather than a necessity required by changes to hardware. The critics called on AMD to reverse the move.