5 ms·

The equivalent of Option 3, send a supported command that tells the runtime capabilities to shut down, has been provided as a user-selectable option by AMD in A

• jacquesm 3y ago
  In a way this is all insane: we are spending a fortune on security globally but at the same time manufacturers get to insert massive backdoors into the hardware and hardly anybody bats an eye.
  • wmf 3y ago
    What if... ME/PSP are actually very low security risk relative to everything else in the system.
    • dboat 3y ago
      It's troubling to have even a potentially very low security risk in hardware I paid for being beyond my reach to resolve.
  • charcircuit 3y ago
    >manufacturers get to insert massive backdoors into the hardware There is no proof that they are >hardly anybody bats an eye. Because only a certain niche of paranoid people are willing to believe that companies are trying to make their systems intentionally insecure so that you can be personally hacked.
    • feanaro 3y ago
      It most certainly doesn't have to be intentionally insecure but it almost definitely is accidentally so. There should be no OS nor network stack running in the firmware, period.
      • fsflover 3y ago
        User-respecting OS running in the firmware can be really useful. It must be FLOSS though. Example: https://puri.sm/posts/pureboots-powerful-recovery-console/ https://puri.sm/posts/pureboots-powerful-recovery-console/.
    • anonymousiam 3y ago
      It's a fact that NSA solicits companies to add security weaknesses to their products. They'll "make an offer you can't refuse" by offering cash (in the form of a contract), and they'll use their influence with other "contractors" and government agencies to punish companies that don't participate. This is not unique to NSA. Security agencies within other governments play the same games with supply chains.
      • charcircuit 3y ago
        Intel making their products insecure is bad for their brand and bad for world wide computer security. Massive amounts of damage could happen by abusing such a backdoor. There is plenty of evidence of Intel claiming that there are no backdoors in their products, but there isn't for some NSA deal for adding a backdoor.
        • nailer 3y ago
          Pardon? Snowden showed huge amounts of NSA backdoors. It’s probably worth limiting the conversation to what they don’t have access to rather than trying to enumerate what they do have access to.
    • jacquesm 3y ago
      You must have slept through Snowden.
      • charcircuit 3y ago
        That is not an argument. You can't justify that everything is secretly backdoored because of some old leak.
        • jacquesm 3y ago
          The safe assumption is that if there is a computer sitting on your LAN that you don't have access to that has access to your stuff that you have a massive security issue in waiting. That it hasn't materialized yet doesn't mean a thing and there are plenty of documented security holes associated with the ME, and likely many more that you simply will never know about. This stuff has been chewed to bits on HN and elsewhere. If you feel different that's fine but with security the old adage 'better safe than sorry' applies very much and given the data collected so far the evidence of 'some old leak' times n is rather more solid than your belief in the opposite. FWIW Intels claims that they would not cooperate with the NSA are worth absolutely nothing because the USG has the power to tell Intel to stay quiet about such a deal. If CISCO could be influenced by the NSA then so can Intel, either through supply chain interdiction or through more direct means. But to categorically claim that this is an impossibility is nonsense, the relevant questions are (1) has it been done? and (2) how would we ever find out given the locked up status of the ME? and (3) who past Snowden would be brave enough to leak the evidence if it exists?
• jacooper 3y ago
  This is probably going to change when AMD switches from AGESA openSIL, fully open firmware.