4 ms·
The US Government has national defense responsibilities. Providing such exploit information to Chinese companies, many with strong ties to the PLA and other go
by tomohawk 9y ago
The US Government has national defense responsibilities. Providing such exploit information to Chinese companies, many with strong ties to the PLA and other government organs, without notifying your own government first, seems irresponsible.
- charlesdm 9y agoIf it was beneficial from a commercial point of view to first disclose to partners outside of the US this makes sense. Intel doesn't exist to serve US national defense responsibilities; they exist to make money.
- jknz 9y agoAny government has national defense responsabilities. With your logic, Intel is a multinational company and should have informed them all, which leads to its own kind of problems. Edit: The only reasonable path seems to inform every government simultaneously, at the same time as the public. How could the EU possibly let Intel sell CPUs, and let Intel inform other governments of vulnerabilities first? So that the other governments have a time window to play with the vulnerability against the EU?
- tomohawk 9y agoOnly if you think there is some sort of moral equivalence between the governments.
- phkahler 9y agoThere is a practical equivalence between governments. If one government could make the case that they should be informed, then any government who bought systems with "Intel Inside" could make the same argument. If you want to split governments into groups based on some notion of morality then you may want to question why a company would be allowed to do business with a country on the wrong side of that morality in the first place. That's actually a discussion I'd like to see.
- tomohawk 9y agoPractically speaking, providing an exploit to the Russian government vs the US government - that would be a different effect, no? How would you justify providing the exploit to the North Koreans, or the Iranians? There is a very practical morality at play here. The Chinese government runs protesters over with tanks, imprisons people without cause, attacks their neighbors without cause, etc. Would it be a good thing to aid such a government? Putting all governments on the same moral plane is counterproductive and nonsensical. Not providing important information to your own government so that they can secure the very systems that protect you - that doesn't seem very practical.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- sammoorhouse 9y ago> The Chinese government runs protesters over with tanks, imprisons people without cause, attacks their neighbors without cause, etc. Oh come on, you're making it too easy!
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- rorykoehler 9y agoIs there not?
- hishnash 9y agoIt's not about moral its about sales, if Intel were to start to tell the US gov directly about security loopholes in products they were still selling to other nations those nations would blacklist intel for life. Just as the US would blacklist intel if they told another nation directly first. (this is even true if they told allied nations) we have seen that just being allies does not stop the US spying (and I'm sure does not stop the opposite as well just turns out the others might be better at keeping things hush hush)
- slededit 9y agoI guess people were expecting them to have a higher level of loyalty to their home country.
- tanilama 9y agoThat gives China a strong case to distrust Intel and use their own chips. It is not like they are not already doing that, but I guess Intel might not really want to add momentum to this process.
- randoramax 9y agoMost likely the NSA already knew, wouldn't they?
- WillPostForFood 9y agoBecause they aren't omniscient, and the signal to noise ratio is very low when considering the total amount of data they can montor.
- kakarot 9y agoI firmly believe that, if the NSA, CIA, and possibly the FBI found out about this exploit, and found out there would be a window of several months to exploit it, then these agencies would be a danger to the safety and security of the American people. Therefore the patriotic and responsible thing would be to help vendors patch their stuff before directly disclosing the bug to any party that would be likely to abuse the exploit. The NSA doesn't play ball and responsibly disclose exploits to vendors immediately after discovering and profiling them, expressly because they want to use the exploits, so why should vendors be obligated to do the reverse?