4 ms·

This is pretty fascinating. The statements by Apple and Amazon on one side vs. Bloomberg are very hard to reconcile. I'm very interested to see where this goes

by jmull 8y ago

This is pretty fascinating. The statements by Apple and Amazon on one side vs. Bloomberg are very hard to reconcile. I'm very interested to see where this goes. I hope we get to find out who is full or crap on this. Either Bloomberg got seriously played (I'm assuming they wouldn't just make up stuff for a good story or report based on sources that didn't appear credible) or Apple and Amazon are lying fearlessly and in great detail. This doesn't seem like the prism situation where it was pretty easy to reconcile the company PR statements with the snowden leaks.

throwaway2048 8y ago
Easy to reconcile them after the facts all came out maybe, who says this time will be different?
comboy 8y ago
It seems that it would only be interesting if Bloomberg was right. People lose trust to companies like Apple or Amazon if they lie. Bloomberg though? Nope, everything would just continue as normal. And Bloomberg is not even that bad. We just got used to bad journalism.
SyneRyder 8y ago
Just to throw some extra info into the mix, Australia's media [1] is reporting that the Australian Department of Defence and Bureau of Meteorology also had contracts with Supermicro. The current Australian Defence Department statement: A Defence spokesperson said the department was "aware of recent media reporting involving the unauthorised implantation of microchips within servers, used by United States corporations, in the production of Supermicro microchips". "Defence will continue to work with the ACSC [Australian Cyber Security Centre] to continue to monitor the situation," the spokesperson said. And from the Bureau of Meteorology: The Bureau of Meteorology said it does not comment on security matters. [1] http://www.abc.net.au/news/science/2018-10-05/supermicro-malicious-chips-china-australian-government/10342006 http://www.abc.net.au/news/science/2018-10-05/supermicro-mal...
kevin_thibedeau 8y ago
How did Bloomberg get the glitzy photographs? Were they just cooked up to have something to show in the article or did their source provide them? What legitimate investigation would have used a pencil as part of their protocol for photographing evidence?

by jmull 8y ago

throwaway2048 8y ago

Easy to reconcile them after the facts all came out maybe, who says this time will be different?

comboy 8y ago

It seems that it would only be interesting if Bloomberg was right. People lose trust to companies like Apple or Amazon if they lie. Bloomberg though? Nope, everything would just continue as normal. And Bloomberg is not even that bad. We just got used to bad journalism.

SyneRyder 8y ago

Just to throw some extra info into the mix, Australia's media [1] is reporting that the Australian Department of Defence and Bureau of Meteorology also had contracts with Supermicro. The current Australian Defence Department statement: A Defence spokesperson said the department was "aware of recent media reporting involving the unauthorised implantation of microchips within servers, used by United States corporations, in the production of Supermicro microchips". "Defence will continue to work with the ACSC [Australian Cyber Security Centre] to continue to monitor the situation," the spokesperson said. And from the Bureau of Meteorology: The Bureau of Meteorology said it does not comment on security matters. [1] http://www.abc.net.au/news/science/2018-10-05/supermicro-malicious-chips-china-australian-government/10342006 http://www.abc.net.au/news/science/2018-10-05/supermicro-mal...

kevin_thibedeau 8y ago

How did Bloomberg get the glitzy photographs? Were they just cooked up to have something to show in the article or did their source provide them? What legitimate investigation would have used a pencil as part of their protocol for photographing evidence?