12 ms·
Is there a way to know that the present chips are not backdoored? Or, backdoored by US? Why should the world be concern about Chinese backdoors and not US ones?
by strooper 7y ago
Is there a way to know that the present chips are not backdoored? Or, backdoored by US? Why should the world be concern about Chinese backdoors and not US ones?
- seandhi 7y agoBecause most of the world has flourished under Pax Americana. The world can only imagine what the Chinese as a world power will bring.
- typon 7y agoI imagine Latin America and the Middle East would disagree a tad bit with you.
- odiroot 7y agoMiddle East is a completely different and much longer story and USA just got involved in a drive-by fashion merely decades ago.
- ajross 7y agoLatin America absolutely would. Yes, there were crimes that we shouldn't forget, but the whole hemisphere is vastly wealthier than it was a century ago, owing almost exclusively to global peace, world trade, and their existence within the US sphere of influence that limited conflict to just a few hot spots. The middle east didn't see the same benefit, and why? Because they sat in the middle of a cold war zone of contention that stoked every existing bit of strife into a hot war.
- bilbo0s 7y agoAfrica would likely disagree as well. In fact I had this very discussion with a group of Africans recently. Yeah, they weren't shy about "educating" me. Some of what they believe is, in my view, not fact based. (At least, it can't be proven in court so to speak.) But, yeah, a lot of what they were saying was definitely true.
- erklik 7y ago> Some of what they believe is, in my view, not fact based. I wouldn't mind hearing what some of those things are.
- Zardoz84 7y agoSo, I must be in gratitude with USA, for helping a fascist regime on my country for nearly 40 years ?
- eloff 7y agoLet's not pretend the US and China are equally authoritarian please.
- bigmanwalter 7y agoSo it's okay if the US monitors and intercepts global communications. But it's bad if China does it?
- pilsetnieks 7y agoNo one said it's ok, so you're operating under false assumptions.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- eloff 7y agoThere are a lot more limitations and checks on what the US can do. So yes, it's way worse if China does it. Because there not beyond imprisoning or killing people over information gained. Secondly we have no reason to believe the US had implemented backdoors in major processors. The problem with the OP is it's whataboutism, it's a logical fallacy to say well A does something bad too, so B doing something bad is equivalent. That's a false equivalency.
- djsumdog 7y agoThe United States has been executing people overseas for decades without any oversight. Predator drones during the Bush/Obama/Trump eras have only increased in use with no sign of decreasing. If you read The Dictators Handbook, the author talks about how more democratic nations use foreign aid as a means to prop up autocratic nations in order to extract their resources (autocracy overseas to support the standard of living of those who are your selectorate). It's like we totally forgot about the 2013 NSA spying revelations, or the 1973 CIA backed coupe in Chile, or the US overthrowing a democratically elected government during the Iranian-Contra crisis... We should absolutely be concerned that the United States could (and does) inject backdoors to spy on other nations, because causing them to destabilize helps with resource extraction and to keep prices low, pleasing the domestic constituency.
- bogwog 7y agoAnyone who has done even a tiny bit of research into the Chinese government wouldn't need to ask that question. Here's a preview: https://www.hrw.org/news/2011/09/22/why-are-people-disappearing-china https://www.hrw.org/news/2011/09/22/why-are-people-disappear... See also what's happening in Hong Kong right now.
- tepidandroid 7y ago> On Aug. 24, Chinese state media announced a proposed change in the Criminal Procedure Law which would allow police to legally detain individuals and hold them incommunicado in secret detention for up to six months without contact with either their families or legal counsel. Up to six months! That's not bad, considering the fact that some prisoners have been held in Guantanamo for 10 years+ and can be detained there indefinitely without trial and subjected to torture [1]. [1] https://www.amnesty.org.uk/guantanamo-bay-human-rights https://www.amnesty.org.uk/guantanamo-bay-human-rights
- vorpalhex 7y agoThe Chinese don't intend this for terrorists who are blowing up rice markets filled with women and children in Iraq, they intend this for journalists and protestors.
- tepidandroid 7y agoWho are allegedly blowing up rice markets filled with women and children in Iraq. Remember, there is no trial. Also, according to the HRW article: > The Chinese government is pitching the proposed change as merely an extension of the conditions of the existing practice of residential surveillance, or “soft arrest,” to suspects in state security, terrorism or major corruption cases. “Soft arrest” allows police to confine criminal suspects to their homes for up to six months without trial or due legal process.
- jandrese 7y agoOr for guys who had an opportunistic neighbor who wanted his land and was willing to "rat him out" to the US forces desperate to capture some bad guys.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- swebs 7y agoMany people consider IME a backdoor https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Management_Engine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Management_Engine
- madez 7y agox86 and its descendants are a no-go for me because of that. Neither Intel nor AMD are willing to produce x86 chips where the end user has full access to the highest privilege levels.
- word-reader 7y agoRight, every (x86) CPU sold since 2008 is already backdoored by the US. Honestly as US citizen who will never go to China, I'd rather be backdoored by China, since they can't throw me in jail, seize all my assets, or generally ruin my life nearly as easily as the US could for breaking some future law.
- Zardoz84 7y agoAMD FX line don't have IME or something similar.
- madez 7y agoCan you backup that claim?
- Forbo 7y agoI found this article that talks about what processor lines have the AMD PSP. https://freundschafter.com/cybersecurity-cpu-and-system-alternatives-without-intel-me-iamt-and-amd-psp-secure-technology/ https://freundschafter.com/cybersecurity-cpu-and-system-alte... > After all this research we definitely found the latest AMD CPUs which do not include any PSP functionality. According to a table from CPU World we know now that these CPUs are those we searched for: Desktop CPUs (Socket FM2): AMD A4-6320 AMD A4-6320B AMD A4-7300 AMD A4 PRO-7300B AMD A6-6420B AMD A6-6420K AMD A8-6600K AMD A10-6800B AMD A10-6800K AMD Athlon X2 370K AMD Athlon X4 760K AMD FX-670K AMD Sempron X2 250 Notebook CPUs (Socket FP2, FS1): AMD A4-5150M AMD A6-5350M AMD A6-5357M AMD A8-5550M AMD A8-5557M AMD A10-5750M AMD A10-5757M
- reenfranchised 7y agoPut it this way— as Americans, we’re all pretty confident that our government doesn’t pay any substantial number of people to go online and propagandize our human rights abuses under the guise of just being reasonable world citizens. (Maybe that’s just because we know that right now our government can’t scratch its ass and elbow at the same time, that we won’t face any penalty for our human rights abuses anyway, and there’s no point in paying bureaucrats to do something that ignorant yokels will go out and do for free... but that’s beside the point :)
- behringer 7y agoWhy would we be pretty confident about that? Edward Snowden himself revealed to what depths the US would stoop, and it's got to be a thousand times worse now than what he reported. There are, in my opinion, definitely Americans out there spreading propaganda about the US on taxpayers money. You yourself could very well be one of those people.
- addicted 7y agoVoice of America. The idea that the US doesn’t covertly spend money on propaganda, when it overtly does and has for decades, is hilarious. I mean, VoA is actually a pretty good, so this isn’t intended to be criticism of it. However, it is intended as propaganda, although a fairly light version of it.
- PaulHoule 7y agoI think the astonishing thing is how incompetent our foreign service is today; even in 1979 the U.S. Embassy had hardly anyone who speaks Persian and got completely blindsided. In 1954 the US was capable of kneecapping Iran and other countries, but today it is too blinded by an ideology that refuses to accept it is an ideology to do the same.
- mangamadaiyan 7y agoSurely you're aware that the 1953 coup d'etat overthrowing the democratically elected government in Iran, and installing the Shah in its place, and hence setting the stage for Khomeini later, was orchestrated by a certain country that you mention?
- yumraj 7y agoAs expected, here comes the whatsboutism the moment there is any comment about China. Worrying about China and US are independent. One can be worried about one or the other or both. I'm not worried about US because despite the current administration, it's a democracy where human rights and various freedoms are guaranteed by the Constitution.
- Doubl 7y agoUnless you are not an American and many people aren't. In which case anything goes.
- AnIdiotOnTheNet 7y agoIs it whataboutism? I think it is more just an acknowledgement that there is literally no escaping this kind of thing, so it is an irrelevant concern in this context. The point isn't "other entities are already doing it, so it's ok", it's "is there any hardware for which this isn't true? Then why is that a reason to dismiss this hardware?".
- Traster 7y agoI think the more important point is that China has a strong track record of IP theft and refusing to recognise international IP claims. So whilst the US is probably more capable of infiltrating your systems, that will largely be a (possibly over-reaching) law-enforcement effort. Whereas you've got the much more direct concern with China that they're not just going to infiltrate your system, they're going to do it so that they can reproduce your company with a CEO with ties to the communist party.
- ncmncm 7y agoThis, also, is incorrect. US dragnet snooping has nothing particular to do with law enforcement. Nobody is allowed to know what is done with the stolen information. When we find out one use, that doesn't preclude any other use. The use that nets the greatest return for any snooped information is extortion. Spooks are very familiar with this use, as it is their go-to method to "turn" people to recruit informants. Of course turning is only one of many uses for the same information. Coercion applied to public officials creates corruption, to judges miscarriages of justice, to police persucution of private enemies. It poisons the public well everywhere it touches. Prosecutors are also very familiar with extortionate use of secrets. We see it in "plea bargains", where people are made to plead guilty to charges prosecutors could not prove in court, but that only scratches the surface. "Constitutional protection" is no shield against any use that doesn't introduce the facts in testimony. Note that having "nothing to hide" doesn't help you if the secret is about somebody else, and used to coerce their actions against you.
- stunt 7y agoLets not jump into politics! Backdoors are bad and it doesn't matter who does it. Good to see development from any country. Obviously they have enough reason to do it. Just consider sanctions. They also have to protect their own market. Anyone that can afford it, should do it. Ultimately it is a good thing from technology prespective.
- bilbo0s 7y ago>Is there a way to know that the present chips are not backdoored?... As a practical matter, that's largely irrelevant to us in the West. The world that's shaping up is a world where we won't be able to get those processors in any case.