3 ms·
Interesting how this article steadfastly refers to the subsystem as AMT and never mentions Management Engine/ME. A deliberate ploy to redirect people away from
by CodeWriter23 9y ago
Interesting how this article steadfastly refers to the subsystem as AMT and never mentions Management Engine/ME. A deliberate ploy to redirect people away from discovering all the ME-disabling research and tech? Perhaps. This is what happens when "journalists" post copypasta from publicists.
- ars 9y agoI quote: "When AMT is enabled, all network packets are redirected to the Intel Management Engine"
- jgaa 9y agoAs far as I know, it's only doing this for the primary (on-chip) network interface. /Never/ use the primary NIC if you have a Intel CPU.
- lima 9y agoWhich is wrong, by the way. What actually happens is that a filter is installed on the NIC that redirects some packets (those addressed to the ME).
- khedoros1 9y agoAMT's an optional component of the ME, it's the part that enables remote management, and it's a flaw in AMT that they're describing. It seems reasonable to talk about the part that has a problem (although it wouldn't have been unreasonable for them to mention that it's part of the IME, of course).
- confounded 9y agoFrom the article: > When AMT is enabled, all network packets are redirected to the Intel Management Engine and from there to the AMT. The packets bypass the OS completely. The vulnerable management features were made available in some but not all Intel chipsets starting in 2010, Embedi has said. The vulnerability is in AMT, not ME (though I agree that the ME is an unnecessary security risk, and am well behind the current research to disable it).