Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

MINIX: ​Intel's hidden in-chip operating system

zdnet.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 113 posts

Re: MINIX: ​Intel's hidden in-chip operating system

#41

Post by m45t3r »

jabl wrote: post #29
deno wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For desktop your options are: — FX 8350 (Piledriver) from AMD with no PSP: very cheap, no flashing necessary, but not the best performance. Single core performance much worse than even Pentium G4620[1]. — Some Intel processors and a Raspberry Pi: much better performance but you have to ME_Clean the firmware, hence the Pi. — POWER9 processor for amazing performance and completely open & free firmware all around: the C…

> Personally I recommend IvyBridge-EP or Haswell Xeon E5 Err, the ME has been present on every Intel system since 2006 or so. The only thing that changed with Skylake is that the ME runs on an x86 core, on previous processors the ME ran on some RISC microcontroller.

I think OP meant to say that you can disable ME in those CPUs, since they are pre-Skylale silicon.

Re: MINIX: ​Intel's hidden in-chip operating system

#43

Post by youdontknowtho »

benevol wrote: post #3
kelsolaar wrote: post #2

I can't remove from my head the thought that the NSA has been exploiting that for years.

No need to. For anybody who's read the Snowden leaks it's 100% plausible that the NSA owns society through hardware backdoors. Conclusion: We need 100% open-source hardware ASAP if we're to become a sane society. Edit: Anyone remember the "Intel inside" trademark [0] which was supposed to add (marketing) value to any PC which was allowed to carry that label? Well, today it's clear that this label actually stands for…

"sane society"

My personal belief is that this is a little optimistic. There's a lot wrong with our society, and intel embedding Minix in the ME doesn't really rise to the top of current issues.

I would really like an option that did not have binary blobs in the bios or CPU. That's tough, though...CPU's always have microcode fixes, don't they?

So far, I think the best option for this kind of thing is the Raptor workstation with the Power7 CPU.

Re: MINIX: ​Intel's hidden in-chip operating system

#44

Post by CamelCaseName »

turblety wrote: post #40

While the backdoor and surveillance arguments are good, and the chips are very likely backdoored (if not deliberately then by undetected bugs) there are other issues with this closed source firmware. Let's say another bug [1] is found that lets anyone remotely control your computer, but Intel becomes bankrupt, or just doesn't see it as a big enough threat to roll out a firmware update. You then essentially have a com…

I find it hard to believe that such a scenario could play out in reality. Surely some government would step forward and compel or even fund a bankrupt Intel to fix such a disaster.

But perhaps I am wet behind the ears, have there been any similar cases on a similar scale in the past?

Re: MINIX: ​Intel's hidden in-chip operating system

#45

Post by userbinator »

turblety wrote: post #40

While the backdoor and surveillance arguments are good, and the chips are very likely backdoored (if not deliberately then by undetected bugs) there are other issues with this closed source firmware. Let's say another bug [1] is found that lets anyone remotely control your computer, but Intel becomes bankrupt, or just doesn't see it as a big enough threat to roll out a firmware update. You then essentially have a com…

The fact that it's closed source is not actually the biggest problem --- it's the fact that the hardware completely refuses to run firmware that's not signed by Intel, and Intel is not giving you the keys or any other way out.

Intel could open-source the firmware, but without any way to use it on the hardware, it'd be useless for anything but finding exploits --- arguably an even worse position. See also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tivoization

All you need is the ability to run your own code on the hardware, legally or otherwise (regardless of what laws exist, no one can stop you from flipping the bits on storage media you possess...), and the community will do the rest. Having the ability to extract the existing code is also immensely helpful, but I'd consider source to be more of a bonus than an absolute requirement. BIOS modding, custom Android ROMs, iOS jailbreaks, console homebrew, whatever else --- you don't need source code, just the ability to run your own.

Crackers, reversers, and security researchers have long been fine operating under the saying: "Source code? We don't need no stinkin' source code!"

...and IMHO the software community could do well to promote this sort of introspection more, to encourage tinkering and exploration and analysis, in contrast to the "can't do anything without source code", "can't do anything without someone else telling you that you can" attitude prevalent today; but, and this may be a bit of a conspiracy theory, I suspect the establishment generally does not approve of such a "hacker" attitude precisely because it means they can't hide anything by "closing the source".

Re: MINIX: ​Intel's hidden in-chip operating system

#46

Post by agumonkey »

benevol wrote: post #3
kelsolaar wrote: post #2

I can't remove from my head the thought that the NSA has been exploiting that for years.

No need to. For anybody who's read the Snowden leaks it's 100% plausible that the NSA owns society through hardware backdoors. Conclusion: We need 100% open-source hardware ASAP if we're to become a sane society. Edit: Anyone remember the "Intel inside" trademark [0] which was supposed to add (marketing) value to any PC which was allowed to carry that label? Well, today it's clear that this label actually stands for…

Well as Bill Binney said, what the NSA can tap into has no real relation to what they can do. They're mostly sucking funding with bad if not useless monitoring tools. Unless they're going after low hanging fruits (accessing some business information, not like avoiding terrorism)

Re: MINIX: ​Intel's hidden in-chip operating system

#47

Post by pjmlp »

turblety wrote: post #40

While the backdoor and surveillance arguments are good, and the chips are very likely backdoored (if not deliberately then by undetected bugs) there are other issues with this closed source firmware. Let's say another bug [1] is found that lets anyone remotely control your computer, but Intel becomes bankrupt, or just doesn't see it as a big enough threat to roll out a firmware update. You then essentially have a com…

You just described the actual situation with most Android devices, smart TVs, home routers and IoT of shame.

Re: MINIX: ​Intel's hidden in-chip operating system

#48

Post by gradschool »

benevol wrote: post #3
kelsolaar wrote: post #2

I can't remove from my head the thought that the NSA has been exploiting that for years.

No need to. For anybody who's read the Snowden leaks it's 100% plausible that the NSA owns society through hardware backdoors. Conclusion: We need 100% open-source hardware ASAP if we're to become a sane society. Edit: Anyone remember the "Intel inside" trademark [0] which was supposed to add (marketing) value to any PC which was allowed to carry that label? Well, today it's clear that this label actually stands for…

In that case why didn't they remotely disable Snowden's laptop when he went on the run? My best guess is that the system isn't yet fully operational.

Re: MINIX: ​Intel's hidden in-chip operating system

#49

Post by majewsky »

CamelCaseName wrote: post #44
turblety wrote: post #40

While the backdoor and surveillance arguments are good, and the chips are very likely backdoored (if not deliberately then by undetected bugs) there are other issues with this closed source firmware. Let's say another bug [1] is found that lets anyone remotely control your computer, but Intel becomes bankrupt, or just doesn't see it as a big enough threat to roll out a firmware update. You then essentially have a com…

I find it hard to believe that such a scenario could play out in reality. Surely some government would step forward and compel or even fund a bankrupt Intel to fix such a disaster. But perhaps I am wet behind the ears, have there been any similar cases on a similar scale in the past?

The government will compel Intel to fix a government backdoor? Sounds unlikely.

Re: MINIX: ​Intel's hidden in-chip operating system

#50

Post by colejohnson66 »

JepZ wrote: post #23

While I am unsure if switchting to Linux for ME is a good solution, open sourcing whatever runs ME is a very important step towards user/customer security. And that is not because we all want to know intels secrets about 'how to make the fastest CPU' but because ME can change the product on a fundamental level while we use the product. The reason I doubt that Linux is a good solution is that linux wasn't built to run…

Well, someone managed to get Linux running on a Motorola 68k of all things: https://www.bigmessowires.com/2014/11/17/68-katy-68000-linux...
Post reply on HN