Would love to see and ARM or MIPS setup get within shouting range of Intel. I have yet to hear any explanation of the IME that makes sense without the presence user-hostile intent.
Uncorrectable freedom and security issues on x86 platforms (2016)
41–50 of 141 posts
Re: Uncorrectable freedom and security issues on x86 platforms (2016)
#42The article states the following for RISCV: >"While this architecture is extremely limited in performance, price" Can anyone say thy the performance of RISCV is so lacking?
Likely because there's no major consumer devices shipping them (or at least high-end versions of them) that could help them hit a scale that brings the cost down, which makes them less viable for a general public consumer standpoint, which means there's less time spent optimizing it. I remember a wihle back when Google was shopping around for Intel replacements (likely a negotiation tactic), people were saying they s…
Funny, I was speaking to some IBM engineers a few months ago and brought up the POWER chips and they kind of laughed and said something to effect that biggest use case for POWER was Google as a means of keeping Intel pricing in check.
Re: Uncorrectable freedom and security issues on x86 platforms (2016)
#43I'm trying to understand all of this and especially the threats to privacy, control of my computing hardware, and data security. I read about some new hard/software for secure boot , etc., but don't recall all the details now. So, for a shorter approach, suppose I just buy a processor from AMD, a motherboard from ASUS, hard disk drives from Western Digital, etc., and plug it all together for myself. So, then I'm the…
2. Depends on the motherboard and the BIOS written in the flash chip
3. No. They are already signed.
4. If somebody controls them and ask them to do so. All that's necesary is a LAN connection (or wifi, but only with Intel chips) and power. The HDD is completely irrelevant, as is the OS.
Re: Uncorrectable freedom and security issues on x86 platforms (2016)
#44Would love to see and ARM or MIPS setup get within shouting range of Intel. I have yet to hear any explanation of the IME that makes sense without the presence user-hostile intent.
The entirety of enterprise laptop management. Not because you don't want users to change their laptop. The point is to be able to run updates for the users.
Or consider the remote KVM option. Disregarding security, that is a sysadmin's wet dream. Being able to recover a system that can't boot saves a lot of boots on the ground.
Re: Uncorrectable freedom and security issues on x86 platforms (2016)
#45Isn't it sci-fi-level incredible, and frankly both scary and shady, that every modern x86 CPU has this forced sub-ring-0 control program? And that the CPU vendors apparently go to extreme lengths in hiding its functionality? Why would even large vendors like Apple or Dell agree to this? The 30-minute timeout is particularly mischievous. It's like they REALLY want to slow down any effort at patching out the ME. Are we…
Re: Uncorrectable freedom and security issues on x86 platforms (2016)
#46Earlier quoted context omitted.
NSA 100% . Some time around 10 years ago governments decided the internet was too "dangerous" to be free. Arab spring cemented that into their minds, and now a bastion of free thought has become the worlds biggest spying apparatus.
So why not build our own network with crypto, blackjack & hookers on libre hardware? Say on an OrangePi PC2 with a bunch of high gain USB 5GHz radios attached, and throw some spinning rust on there so you can run a Nextcloud instance and/or join your local Ceph cluster/IPFS. We have CJDNS (which salsa20's all your data & can VPN legacy networks to ya), fully FLOSS SBCs for under $20ea, and 802.11n and AC outdoor radi…
Re: Uncorrectable freedom and security issues on x86 platforms (2016)
#47This needs more attention. Particularly now that AMD may actually look into cooperating with the community on this matter somewhat. I wouldn't get my hopes up yet though, as this was a Reddit AMA done during a time when AMD is keen to please the community. This matter must not go away for something to be done about it.
RISC-V comes to mind as an open and free instruction set. The step to an actual implemented-in-silicon processor is pretty big though, and for any such chip it's hard to verify that it really is as free as it's claimed to be. You can't diassemble your CPU (or perhaps you can, but for very few values of "you").
That'll build confidence that the others aren't compromised.
The costs could be reasonable (http://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/7042/how-much...) under a kickstarter-style campaign.
Re: Uncorrectable freedom and security issues on x86 platforms (2016)
#48Would love to see and ARM or MIPS setup get within shouting range of Intel. I have yet to hear any explanation of the IME that makes sense without the presence user-hostile intent.
> I have yet to hear any explanation of the IME that makes sense without the presence user-hostile intent. The entirety of enterprise laptop management. Not because you don't want users to change their laptop. The point is to be able to run updates for the users. Or consider the remote KVM option. Disregarding security, that is a sysadmin's wet dream. Being able to recover a system that can't boot saves a lot of boot…
Re: Uncorrectable freedom and security issues on x86 platforms (2016)
#49The article states the following for RISCV: >"While this architecture is extremely limited in performance, price" Can anyone say thy the performance of RISCV is so lacking?
This is not easy to acquire or build. Some is wisdom from decades of design and iteration. Some is hundreds of thousands of engineering hours. Some is big money.
RISC V is a new open source project. Who knows how close they will ever get.