The Big Hack: How China Used a Tiny Chip to Infiltrate Amazon and Apple

So the chip shown in the article looks like a typical SMD balun, it is a type of transformer used to adapt impedance between two transmission line. It’s designed to replace a series a lumped element (capacitor, inductors, resistors) normally used for impedance adaptation (in a T or Pi network). The most common used for the device is directly between an antenna an a RF front-end to serve as an antenna tuner.

Technically you could embed and power an RF front-end inside a “flavored” balun to intercept or alter any communication passing through that front-end or even use the antenna to communicate during the down time. So this literally would hack Wifi / Bluetooth at low level and inject code and at the same time create a mesh network of malicious devices to relay information. Welcome to IoT Cyberwarfare.

But this clever hack is probably not limited to RF and is likely to also be embedded in transformers used for isolating Ethernet lines. Common mode chokes (some SMD chokes also look like the chip they are showing) or even some integrated ESD protection solution would be an ideal target as they are inserted in series of the signal.

> I hope this corrects the mistaken believe that China can't home grow sophisticated tech.

There's nothing particularly sophisticated about what they did, especially given what China has access to as one of the central hubs of tech manufacturing. There are two dozen nations (or more) that could do this from a strictly technical standpoint (few have the kind of required supply chain access to pull it off at scale in actuality). It's the audacity that is primarily impressive. China is encouraging all of their richest trading partners to further isolate them when it comes to supply chain and advanced tech. They're confirming for the 107th time what everyone already believes.

> ...but not a single time is it questioned who they planted it for...

The article and some accompanying reporting on Bloomberg audio/video segments says the attack seems targeted relatively specifically towards nearly 30 organizations (only US-based organizations were mentioned as targets, unknown if the list included organizations based in other nations). One known vector was through four subcontractors in China that built the boards for Supermicro's main Shanghai factory, specifically by bribing and/or coercing managers of those subcontractors' factories to go along with accepting the chip shipments and to make changes to the plant floor from the design to perform the chip insertions.

Designing and building a chip like this and then mounting the logistical effort to performing the insertions costing some non-trivial funds, coupled with the known targets, (Amazon didn't seem specifically targeted, Elemental a company they acquired was, who notably has US national security clients), form the circumstantial allegation that a PLA spy unit was behind the attack. You are correct that this doesn't entirely rule out a false flag possibility, but until we get more details about this, we're operating in the dark.

A false flag is an interesting supposition, but how would the US benefit from successfully convincing the world of the false flag's cover story?