4 ms·

So, both the British and US governments are on the record confirming Apple and Amazon's statements. The next step should be Bloomberg's internal investigation s

by Jerry2 8y ago

So, both the British and US governments are on the record confirming Apple and Amazon's statements. The next step should be Bloomberg's internal investigation so they can figure out how that story got published without any corroborating evidence. Supermicro's stock took a beating and now they will have a legal case against Bloomberg.

Simon_says 8y ago
I don't see why it's so clear cut. The available evidence is congruent with Bloomberg's story being either true or false.
- nmg 8y ago
  "Editor's note: The following story is either true or false" doesn't have a very journalistic ring to it..
coolspot 8y ago
But it is still possible that DHS is just not aware of CIA/NSA discoveries and activities. There were suspicious events that signal that something is up, like when Apple completely switched from Supermicro to other vendors or when they started to develop processes to prevent supply chain hardware attack around time when CIA supposedly found the bug (2015-2016). iPhone is also switched from Qualcomm modem to US designed and fabricated by Intel.
- paranoidrobot 8y ago
  Switching from one vendor to another could come from any number of reasons. Also, their work on supply-chain security is also at the same time that Apple was more publicly promoting the security of their own hardware. So those two things could be entirely co-incidental. That said, short of a release of internal documents, I don't think anyone outside has a decent idea of what's going on.
- kccqzy 8y ago
  > iPhone is [sic] also switched from Qualcomm modem to US designed and fabricated by Intel. Qualcomm is based in San Diego, CA.
  - coolspot 8y ago
    Supermicro is based in San Jose, CA . Qualcomm is fabless company, manufacturing chips among others in Taiwan.
- praneshp 8y ago
  Qualcomm is also American
  - coolspot 8y ago
    They are fabless though.
    - subcosmos 8y ago
      Read this as "fabulous" - that they are ....
dx87 8y ago
There's still too many weasel words in the statement. They didn't confirm that the article is wrong, the said "we have no reason to doubt the statements from the companies named in the story". That could just be another way of saying "we have no reason to doubt that Apple and Amazon weren't aware of the issue." It could also just be DHS trying to cover their ass. They say that supply chain security is core to their mission, so having an article come out alleging that the most valuable company in the world and the primary supplier of government cloud infrastructure were affected by a compromised supply chain would be pretty embarrasing for DHS.
- yalogin 8y ago
  At any other moment in history there might be a possibility but I strongly believe that Trump would be more than willing to announce it to the world if this is even under a bit of a doubt. Simply because we haven’t seen any tweets complaining yet I believe that no such thing happened.
bradleyjg 8y ago
> Supermicro's stock took a beating and now they will have a legal case against Bloomberg. Under the First Amendment Supermicro would have to prove actual malice—that is that Bloomberg knee its reporting was false or acted with reckless disregard for the truth. That’s a very difficult standard to meet.
- ikeboy 8y ago
  Could they subpoena Bloomberg for their sources and sue them?
  - anon49124 8y ago
    IANAL, but this website mentions Chobani sued Alex Jones / InfoWars over allegedly defamatory, fictitious statements. [0] Perhaps Bloomberg can be sued for defamation by Supermicro if discovery can turn up evidence that the story was both malicious and intentional. 0. https://www.robertreeveslaw.com/blog/sued-fake-news/ https://www.robertreeveslaw.com/blog/sued-fake-news/
  - bradleyjg 8y ago
    The answer is complicated but boils down to: probably not. Both California and New York (the two most plausible jurisdictions for such a suit) have shield laws that create a qualified reporter’s privilege. That’s in addition to the constitutional news gathering privilege, if any (it’s an area where the case law is not entirely settled.)
headsoup 8y ago
Actually they said they have 'no reason to doubt' them, which would imply that if something damning was found they could then just say 'ah well now we have reason to doubt.' In other words, they said nothing at all.

by Jerry2 8y ago

Simon_says 8y ago

I don't see why it's so clear cut. The available evidence is congruent with Bloomberg's story being either true or false.

nmg 8y ago
"Editor's note: The following story is either true or false" doesn't have a very journalistic ring to it..

coolspot 8y ago

But it is still possible that DHS is just not aware of CIA/NSA discoveries and activities. There were suspicious events that signal that something is up, like when Apple completely switched from Supermicro to other vendors or when they started to develop processes to prevent supply chain hardware attack around time when CIA supposedly found the bug (2015-2016). iPhone is also switched from Qualcomm modem to US designed and fabricated by Intel.

paranoidrobot 8y ago
Switching from one vendor to another could come from any number of reasons. Also, their work on supply-chain security is also at the same time that Apple was more publicly promoting the security of their own hardware. So those two things could be entirely co-incidental. That said, short of a release of internal documents, I don't think anyone outside has a decent idea of what's going on.
kccqzy 8y ago
> iPhone is [sic] also switched from Qualcomm modem to US designed and fabricated by Intel. Qualcomm is based in San Diego, CA.
- coolspot 8y ago
  Supermicro is based in San Jose, CA . Qualcomm is fabless company, manufacturing chips among others in Taiwan.
praneshp 8y ago
Qualcomm is also American
- coolspot 8y ago
  They are fabless though.
  - subcosmos 8y ago
    Read this as "fabulous" - that they are ....

dx87 8y ago

There's still too many weasel words in the statement. They didn't confirm that the article is wrong, the said "we have no reason to doubt the statements from the companies named in the story". That could just be another way of saying "we have no reason to doubt that Apple and Amazon weren't aware of the issue." It could also just be DHS trying to cover their ass. They say that supply chain security is core to their mission, so having an article come out alleging that the most valuable company in the world and the primary supplier of government cloud infrastructure were affected by a compromised supply chain would be pretty embarrasing for DHS.

yalogin 8y ago
At any other moment in history there might be a possibility but I strongly believe that Trump would be more than willing to announce it to the world if this is even under a bit of a doubt. Simply because we haven’t seen any tweets complaining yet I believe that no such thing happened.

bradleyjg 8y ago

> Supermicro's stock took a beating and now they will have a legal case against Bloomberg. Under the First Amendment Supermicro would have to prove actual malice—that is that Bloomberg knee its reporting was false or acted with reckless disregard for the truth. That’s a very difficult standard to meet.

ikeboy 8y ago
Could they subpoena Bloomberg for their sources and sue them?
- anon49124 8y ago
  IANAL, but this website mentions Chobani sued Alex Jones / InfoWars over allegedly defamatory, fictitious statements. [0] Perhaps Bloomberg can be sued for defamation by Supermicro if discovery can turn up evidence that the story was both malicious and intentional. 0. https://www.robertreeveslaw.com/blog/sued-fake-news/ https://www.robertreeveslaw.com/blog/sued-fake-news/
- bradleyjg 8y ago
  The answer is complicated but boils down to: probably not. Both California and New York (the two most plausible jurisdictions for such a suit) have shield laws that create a qualified reporter’s privilege. That’s in addition to the constitutional news gathering privilege, if any (it’s an area where the case law is not entirely settled.)

headsoup 8y ago

Actually they said they have 'no reason to doubt' them, which would imply that if something damning was found they could then just say 'ah well now we have reason to doubt.' In other words, they said nothing at all.