6 ms·
Hard to know from the article, and Bloomberg does not have a good track record, if the 'backdoor' was a vulnerability , an unwanted feature or an actual backdoo
by steve19 7y ago
Hard to know from the article, and Bloomberg does not have a good track record, if the 'backdoor' was a vulnerability , an unwanted feature or an actual backdoor.
I might imagine a Chinese headline with "US firm Intel backdoors every CPU", which may or may not be true depending on your feelings on Intel ME
- undecisive 7y agoYeah. Quite telling when every quote from Vodaphone uses the word "Vulnerability", not backdoor.
- kbumsik 7y ago> Europe’s biggest phone company identified hidden backdoors in the software that could have given Huawei unauthorized access to the carrier’s fixed-line network in Italy, a system that provides internet service to millions of homes and businesses I think it is enough to be called a "backdoor".
- gloflo 7y agoNo, when reading the whole article, there are much more varied interpretations. Bloomberg added the 'political' backdoor spin.
- danarmak 7y agoA backdoor is a deliberate remote-access vulnerability that the creator intended to use for illegitimate access. The same code, but intentional, is a bug and vulnerability, but not a backdoor. Same security implications, but a big difference wrt. culpability, appropriate punishment, and expectations of future behavior.
- chopin 7y ago>A backdoor is a deliberate remote-access vulnerability that the creator intended to use for illegitimate access. I beg to differ. A backdoor gives access which the legitimate owner cannot control. I don't mind any intention.
- danarmak 7y agoIt's true that "backdoor" is sometimes used as you defined. I feel that some usage, like this article, implies a deliberate backdoor. But you're right that it's an implication and not an explicit statement. One reason that I feel this implication here is that an 'unintentional' backdoor vulnerability can be exploited by any attacker, but the article focuses on this backdoor's exploitability by Huawei, and by implication their untrustworthiness.
- VvR-Ox 7y agoIntel ME _is_ a backdoor. The funny thing is that there are many more. Interesting how the EU is dealing with this - most media seems to focus on how badly china could be spying while the US proved they aren't trustworthy long before.
- pizzapill 7y agoPretty obvious how the EU will deal with it. I once read the official statement of the German government that there is no way the US is spying on us while walking past dozens of huge radomes on a US base close to ESA hq. I read the news when it was discovered that our intelligence service regularly updated NSA selectors to spy on internet users and never looked into what they were updating. Suddenly they "found out" that the US wasn't looking as much for terrorists but more for industrial secrets. Ups, who would've thought. I don't want to spied on by the Chinese government but it doesn't matter much when I'm 100% spied on by at least the USA and the UK.
- meragrin 7y agoESA headquarters is listed as in Paris. I'm not seeing any US bases near Paris. Orly used to be a US base but was shutdown in 1967 and is now a civilian airport.
- pizzapill 7y agoSorry I meant the European Space Operation Centre (ESOC) in Darmstadt, Germany. Its almost neighboring the dagger complex [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dagger_Complex https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dagger_Complex] of the US INSCOM/NSA.
- fxfan 7y agoYou haven't worked for large companies have you? Intel ME is NOT a backdoor. It may have vulnerabilities, sure. But none explicitly put in there. It was designed for a specific purpose- troubleshooting enterprise computers. And it does that job amazingly well. No more IT guy guiding me when he can just do all the clicks himself.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]