3 ms·

ME is actually a gasp useful feature. The problem is with Intel's implementation of it: it's not open source, it can't be disabled, and it's buggy. Fix all thre

ME is actually a gasp useful feature. The problem is with Intel's implementation of it: it's not open source, it can't be disabled, and it's buggy. Fix all three of those, and Intel's stock will go up.

zanny 9y ago
Do you really think enough people care about the ME / control of hardware in general / hardware that spies on you or is out of your control to influence the stock price of a company the size of Intel?
- IgorPartola 9y ago
  No. That's exactly what I'm saying. Most people don't care. Enterprise users do care because ME is useful for them. It's a feature, not a nefarious backdoor that the NSA made Intel include under the cover of darkness. They'll see this as a small problem that should be fixed and will ask Intel to do so. Intel will fix it, most everyone will move on. I don't think ME will take down Intel stock, and neither will this page isolation bug. Intel's value is 99% engineering + manufacturing ability + customer relations. It would be a poor CEO indeed who'd direct their IT to start buying AMD because of this alone.
  - uhhhhhhh 9y ago
    If my recollection serves, when Intel had what was the largest/most expensive recall in the world in the 90's (at that time anyways), their stock still nearly doubled that year.
  - Sir_Substance 9y ago
    >It's a feature, not a nefarious backdoor that the NSA made Intel include under the cover of darkness. Let's be clear: It's both.
    - IgorPartola 9y ago
      Is it? Again, that a big claim to make in five words and drop the mic. Can you cite anything to back it up?
      - Sir_Substance 9y ago
        If Intel weren't under pressure to keep a negative-ring network enabled snoopstack open by an external entity, they would by now definitely have released an update that allowed people to disable the networking aspect of IME. Major system vendors are now offering to apply bootleg removal situations at the factory on customer request[1]. That request is not free. People are willing to /pay extra/ for no-IME laptops. Either Intels marketing and public relations department are asleep at the wheel, or they've gone to the top to request a friendly switch to disable this and been told by the legal department that they can't have one. [1]https://liliputing.com/2017/12/dell-also-sells-laptops-intel-management-engine-disabled.html https://liliputing.com/2017/12/dell-also-sells-laptops-intel...
        IgorPartola 9y ago
        OK, but that's (a) 100% speculation and (b) fails Hanlon's razor. I don't like the fact that you can't disable ME, that it's not open source, and that it's vulnerable any more than anyone else. But this does seem like hyperbole much more than fact.
        Sir_Substance 9y ago
        >OK, but that's (a) 100% speculation 95% speculation. The last 5% comes from exercising basic pattern recognition. I remind you that we're probably talking about interference from the organization that arranged this: https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/05/photos-of-an-nsa-upgrade-factory-show-cisco-router-getting-implant/ https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/05/photos-of-an-nsa... The existence of that program was pure speculation, until it turned out to be totally real. >(b) fails Hanlon's razor. This is completely irrelevant to any argument made between two informed participants. It's worse than speculation, it's a plea to glib colloquialisms. Any chance you've got evidence or even reasoned speculation supporting the theory that the worlds most successful CPU manufacturer has an incompetent marketing department?
  - technion 9y ago
    That's the narrative, but consulted to a lot of enterprises, and I've never once seen ME in use. Servers have hardware like HPE iLO, and desktops will use OS based agents. And failing that they'll use PXE boot and get rebuilt. The only discussion I've ever seen an Enterprise have about ME was the debate about how you deal with HPE's latest laptop security update.
    - myrandomcomment 9y ago
      And the sad part is the current LOM stuff is not better (even somewhat worse) then the stuff on Sun gear from the late 90s. Oh well.

zanny 9y ago

Do you really think enough people care about the ME / control of hardware in general / hardware that spies on you or is out of your control to influence the stock price of a company the size of Intel?

IgorPartola 9y ago
No. That's exactly what I'm saying. Most people don't care. Enterprise users do care because ME is useful for them. It's a feature, not a nefarious backdoor that the NSA made Intel include under the cover of darkness. They'll see this as a small problem that should be fixed and will ask Intel to do so. Intel will fix it, most everyone will move on. I don't think ME will take down Intel stock, and neither will this page isolation bug. Intel's value is 99% engineering + manufacturing ability + customer relations. It would be a poor CEO indeed who'd direct their IT to start buying AMD because of this alone.
- uhhhhhhh 9y ago
  If my recollection serves, when Intel had what was the largest/most expensive recall in the world in the 90's (at that time anyways), their stock still nearly doubled that year.
- Sir_Substance 9y ago
  >It's a feature, not a nefarious backdoor that the NSA made Intel include under the cover of darkness. Let's be clear: It's both.
  - IgorPartola 9y ago
    Is it? Again, that a big claim to make in five words and drop the mic. Can you cite anything to back it up?
    - Sir_Substance 9y ago
      If Intel weren't under pressure to keep a negative-ring network enabled snoopstack open by an external entity, they would by now definitely have released an update that allowed people to disable the networking aspect of IME. Major system vendors are now offering to apply bootleg removal situations at the factory on customer request[1]. That request is not free. People are willing to /pay extra/ for no-IME laptops. Either Intels marketing and public relations department are asleep at the wheel, or they've gone to the top to request a friendly switch to disable this and been told by the legal department that they can't have one. [1]https://liliputing.com/2017/12/dell-also-sells-laptops-intel-management-engine-disabled.html https://liliputing.com/2017/12/dell-also-sells-laptops-intel...
      - IgorPartola 9y ago
        OK, but that's (a) 100% speculation and (b) fails Hanlon's razor. I don't like the fact that you can't disable ME, that it's not open source, and that it's vulnerable any more than anyone else. But this does seem like hyperbole much more than fact.
        Sir_Substance 9y ago
        >OK, but that's (a) 100% speculation 95% speculation. The last 5% comes from exercising basic pattern recognition. I remind you that we're probably talking about interference from the organization that arranged this: https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/05/photos-of-an-nsa-upgrade-factory-show-cisco-router-getting-implant/ https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/05/photos-of-an-nsa... The existence of that program was pure speculation, until it turned out to be totally real. >(b) fails Hanlon's razor. This is completely irrelevant to any argument made between two informed participants. It's worse than speculation, it's a plea to glib colloquialisms. Any chance you've got evidence or even reasoned speculation supporting the theory that the worlds most successful CPU manufacturer has an incompetent marketing department?
- technion 9y ago
  That's the narrative, but consulted to a lot of enterprises, and I've never once seen ME in use. Servers have hardware like HPE iLO, and desktops will use OS based agents. And failing that they'll use PXE boot and get rebuilt. The only discussion I've ever seen an Enterprise have about ME was the debate about how you deal with HPE's latest laptop security update.
  - myrandomcomment 9y ago
    And the sad part is the current LOM stuff is not better (even somewhat worse) then the stuff on Sun gear from the late 90s. Oh well.