4 ms·

What if the backdoor is designed by Intel instead of Microsoft? Spoiler alert, if you have any Intel CPU released after 2006-2008, you have one. https://libre

What if the backdoor is designed by Intel instead of Microsoft? Spoiler alert, if you have any Intel CPU released after 2006-2008, you have one. https://libreboot.org/faq.html#intel https://libreboot.org/faq.html#intel

pdimitar 5y ago
Oh I know. That's why I am moving to AMD gradually. But I hear they are not much better. Scary stuff, dude.
- npteljes 5y ago
  Not much better in theory, and the implementation details are not very well documented to say the least, same with Intel ME. Sometimes there are uefi settings that let you turn these off. Me_cleaner can at least cripple the ME. So strange that we have to deal with this, along with many hardware having an independent system running god knows what.
  - pdimitar 5y ago
    Yeah, I know about it. If I only could do it... :(
- boring_twenties 5y ago
  AMD's PSP is pretty much the same thing. In the past few years AMD has started including a BIOS option to disable it. However, I have never seen a convincing explanation of how exactly that option works. The only thing I know is that Linux complains about it at boot on my B450M (from 2019): Aug 30 23:52:07 kobold kernel: [ 4.811829] ccp 0000:07:00.1: ccp: unable to access the device: you might be running a broken BIOS. Aug 30 23:52:07 kobold kernel: [ 4.811831] ccp 0000:07:00.1: psp: unable to access the device: you might be running a broken BIOS. Intel includes no such option, but on the other hand there is stuff like https://github.com/corna/me_cleaner/ https://github.com/corna/me_cleaner/. In the absense of any detailed information about how AMD'S PSP disable option actually works, I guess I would trust this a little more. However it requires getting your hands dirty, attaching a programmer directly to the chip (on the motherboard), and is not without risk.
  - pdimitar 5y ago
    Yep, and now I am bitterly regretting never picking up electronics skills. :( I entertained the idea of me_cleaner many times but yeah, I really can't afford to lose any of my machines and I can't trust almost anyone to do it properly except me -- and I can't do it. Can you clarify on AMD's PSP? Did you start getting the message after you (supposedly) deactivated it in BIOS? Or is the message only visible when it's active? Or is it always visible?
    - boring_twenties 5y ago
      > I really can't afford to lose any of my machines You might consider picking up a cheap used motherboard from ebay or the like to experiment with, if you're really interested. > Did you start getting the message after you (supposedly) deactivated it in BIOS? Yes.
      - pdimitar 5y ago
        Pretty weird. I'd think the entire point of Intel ME and AMD PSP is that they are completely invisible to the user of the machine. Putting a BIOS option... kind of sounds like the failed Do-Not-Track HTTP header which a lot of advertising networks ironically used as a one more data point to pinpoint who you are. (lol)
        boring_twenties 5y ago
        Nah, they're not invisible. They provide a wide range of anti-features that are visible. TPM, DRM, AMT, stuff like that. Of course, the scariest parts are the ones that are invisible, and I have no idea if the BIOS flag disables everything, or just the parts you can see.
        pdimitar 5y ago
        Do you have a link that does a deep dive on all the features that the management engines are supposed to provide?

pdimitar 5y ago

Oh I know. That's why I am moving to AMD gradually. But I hear they are not much better. Scary stuff, dude.

npteljes 5y ago
Not much better in theory, and the implementation details are not very well documented to say the least, same with Intel ME. Sometimes there are uefi settings that let you turn these off. Me_cleaner can at least cripple the ME. So strange that we have to deal with this, along with many hardware having an independent system running god knows what.
- pdimitar 5y ago
  Yeah, I know about it. If I only could do it... :(
boring_twenties 5y ago
AMD's PSP is pretty much the same thing. In the past few years AMD has started including a BIOS option to disable it. However, I have never seen a convincing explanation of how exactly that option works. The only thing I know is that Linux complains about it at boot on my B450M (from 2019): Aug 30 23:52:07 kobold kernel: [ 4.811829] ccp 0000:07:00.1: ccp: unable to access the device: you might be running a broken BIOS. Aug 30 23:52:07 kobold kernel: [ 4.811831] ccp 0000:07:00.1: psp: unable to access the device: you might be running a broken BIOS. Intel includes no such option, but on the other hand there is stuff like https://github.com/corna/me_cleaner/ https://github.com/corna/me_cleaner/. In the absense of any detailed information about how AMD'S PSP disable option actually works, I guess I would trust this a little more. However it requires getting your hands dirty, attaching a programmer directly to the chip (on the motherboard), and is not without risk.
- pdimitar 5y ago
  Yep, and now I am bitterly regretting never picking up electronics skills. :( I entertained the idea of me_cleaner many times but yeah, I really can't afford to lose any of my machines and I can't trust almost anyone to do it properly except me -- and I can't do it. Can you clarify on AMD's PSP? Did you start getting the message after you (supposedly) deactivated it in BIOS? Or is the message only visible when it's active? Or is it always visible?
  - boring_twenties 5y ago
    > I really can't afford to lose any of my machines You might consider picking up a cheap used motherboard from ebay or the like to experiment with, if you're really interested. > Did you start getting the message after you (supposedly) deactivated it in BIOS? Yes.
    - pdimitar 5y ago
      Pretty weird. I'd think the entire point of Intel ME and AMD PSP is that they are completely invisible to the user of the machine. Putting a BIOS option... kind of sounds like the failed Do-Not-Track HTTP header which a lot of advertising networks ironically used as a one more data point to pinpoint who you are. (lol)
      - boring_twenties 5y ago
        Nah, they're not invisible. They provide a wide range of anti-features that are visible. TPM, DRM, AMT, stuff like that. Of course, the scariest parts are the ones that are invisible, and I have no idea if the BIOS flag disables everything, or just the parts you can see.
        pdimitar 5y ago
        Do you have a link that does a deep dive on all the features that the management engines are supposed to provide?