4 ms·
I'm not too familiar with the inner workings of Intel ME. Have you verified that setting the HAP bit is effective with the ME code removed? If so, then that is
by gnu8 9y ago
I'm not too familiar with the inner workings of Intel ME. Have you verified that setting the HAP bit is effective with the ME code removed? If so, then that is obviously the way to go. However, if the code that interprets the HAP bit and shuts down the ME is removed (as well as everything else not necessary for the computer to run), which option is actually safer, HAP or code removal?
- forapurpose 9y agoA very important question.
- Kliment 9y agoThe safest option is to do both, and that's what's happening here (though the post is not clear on it, they're running me_cleaner with options that both erase all but the initial loader module of ME, and set the bit so it disables itself after startup instead of loading other modules)
- forapurpose 9y agoGenerally speaking, if you have two options, it's not at all true that doing both is necessarily better than doing one or the other.
- jackpot51 9y agoWe do both - set HAP and remove code.
- forapurpose 9y agoI think gnu8 was asking: Does removing the code interfere with HAP mode (e.g., by removing code necessary for HAP to be activated, maintained, operated, etc.)? Is both really safer than one or the other? For example, there may be two drugs that can treat my illness; taking both might not be better than taking one or the other.
- gnu8 9y agoYes thank you, you understand my question.