4 ms·
In true HN fashion, I’m not an expert either, but I can think of two plausible reasons. 1) Directly compromising via software the BMC is easy to detect if you
by jonathankoren 8y ago
In true HN fashion, I’m not an expert either, but I can think of two plausible reasons.
1) Directly compromising via software the BMC is easy to detect if you bothered to look. (i.e. checksums don’t match), and would only last as long as the BMC isn’t flashed.
2) It’s simply currently easier to make a second component, rather than to integrate it into the main chip directly. Of course, if I was in charge of this project, I’d already be investing resources into exploring this option.
- dboreham 8y ago3) the purpose of the operation was to produce headlines and fear in the western press. A few bytes changed in some firmware, or even a malicious BMC design (presumably they're gate-array designs, not full-custom) wouldn't allow for macro photos of a chip the size of a grain of rice and all that.