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

Super Micro says review found no malicious chips in motherboards

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 355 posts

Re: Super Micro says review found no malicious chips in motherboards

#11

Post by thoughtsimple »

cannedslime wrote: post #3

So let me get this straight... Super Micro hired a firm, who then asked the manufacturers, "Hey guys can we please have your design files for your PCBs" and then they looked at the parts list and said, "Nope, no dedicated backdoor chips here" ? They didn't really do a thorough examination of the devices in question, but asked the manufacturer for the CAD files?

From the article: “Nardello tested samples of motherboards in current production and versions that were sold to Apple Inc and Amazon.com Inc, which were both named in the article, the person said.”

At some point it is up to Bloomberg to show something. It isn’t possible to show a negative in this case.

Re: Super Micro says review found no malicious chips in motherboards

#12

Post by blakesterz »

assblaster wrote: post #2

The question I have is: is it possible that there was such an incredible threat to national security that even an auditor could be convinced by a federal agency to give a false report? If it really didn't happen, how could a reputable news agency get a report so wrong? What exactly is going on here?

I keep asking the same thing "how could a reputable news agency get a report so wrong?" They said they have many sources, they double checked things. But the denials from the various places have been SO 100% unbelievably "NO NEVER HAPPENED" that it's hard to know what's going on. If it really never did happen, why did so many people lie about this to reporters? What was the end game? It seems impossible that the reporters just made it all up, doesn't it? But maybe someone paid them to make it all up!

It's just crazy conspiracies all the way down.

Re: Super Micro says review found no malicious chips in motherboards

#14

Post by pmorici »

assblaster wrote: post #2

The question I have is: is it possible that there was such an incredible threat to national security that even an auditor could be convinced by a federal agency to give a false report? If it really didn't happen, how could a reputable news agency get a report so wrong? What exactly is going on here?

I think the most likely explanation is that Bloomberg got played by the sources who perhaps wanted to trade on the price action the story would obviously cause.

We don't really know anything about Bloomberg's sources we do know the nature of all the parties denying any of this is true.

Re: Super Micro says review found no malicious chips in motherboards

#15

Post by Cyph0n »

nscalf wrote: post #7
assblaster wrote: post #2

The question I have is: is it possible that there was such an incredible threat to national security that even an auditor could be convinced by a federal agency to give a false report? If it really didn't happen, how could a reputable news agency get a report so wrong? What exactly is going on here?

It's definitely easier for a reporter to be a little over eager with a story and run it before being fully vetted than it is to co-opt federal agencies and independent auditors. I'm not saying that it's not possible for the situation you described to have happened, just that it would be an extreme outlier.

That's true, but why hasn't Bloomberg retracted the article yet? It's been two months since the piece was published.

Given all this attention, don't you think that Bloomberg would have issued a retraction by now if it was simply the case of an overzealous reporter?

Re: Super Micro says review found no malicious chips in motherboards

#17

Post by cm2187 »

pmorici wrote: post #14
assblaster wrote: post #2

The question I have is: is it possible that there was such an incredible threat to national security that even an auditor could be convinced by a federal agency to give a false report? If it really didn't happen, how could a reputable news agency get a report so wrong? What exactly is going on here?

I think the most likely explanation is that Bloomberg got played by the sources who perhaps wanted to trade on the price action the story would obviously cause. We don't really know anything about Bloomberg's sources we do know the nature of all the parties denying any of this is true.

I find that highly unlikely. Since Supermicro was kicked out of the NASDAQ, I would expect their trading to be much thinner. It would be trivial for regulators to spot some inside trades. And if the sources are indeed intelligence officials, I'd expect their financials to be under special scrutiny.

Re: Super Micro says review found no malicious chips in motherboards

#18

Post by newaccoutnas »

cm2187 wrote: post #17
pmorici wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the most likely explanation is that Bloomberg got played by the sources who perhaps wanted to trade on the price action the story would obviously cause. We don't really know anything about Bloomberg's sources we do know the nature of all the parties denying any of this is true.

I find that highly unlikely. Since Supermicro was kicked out of the NASDAQ, I would expect their trading to be much thinner. It would be trivial for regulators to spot some inside trades. And if the sources are indeed intelligence officials, I'd expect their financials to be under special scrutiny.

It wasn't only Supermicro that took a hit but also any company using their products (AWS etc)

Re: Super Micro says review found no malicious chips in motherboards

#19

Post by cannedslime »

hau wrote: post #9
cannedslime wrote: post #3

So let me get this straight... Super Micro hired a firm, who then asked the manufacturers, "Hey guys can we please have your design files for your PCBs" and then they looked at the parts list and said, "Nope, no dedicated backdoor chips here" ? They didn't really do a thorough examination of the devices in question, but asked the manufacturer for the CAD files?

You should really do thorough examination of the article it's really short. They did examine hardware both in production and already sold to Apple and Amazon samples.

Well what I was wondering was, what did they examine to be exact? Did they decap chips and reverse engineer them?

The article as you say, is really short. Too short, there isn't really any information in it, besides "Trend micro said this, take their word for it"...

Re: Super Micro says review found no malicious chips in motherboards

#20

Post by cannedslime »

thoughtsimple wrote: post #11
cannedslime wrote: post #3

So let me get this straight... Super Micro hired a firm, who then asked the manufacturers, "Hey guys can we please have your design files for your PCBs" and then they looked at the parts list and said, "Nope, no dedicated backdoor chips here" ? They didn't really do a thorough examination of the devices in question, but asked the manufacturer for the CAD files?

From the article: “Nardello tested samples of motherboards in current production and versions that were sold to Apple Inc and Amazon.com Inc, which were both named in the article, the person said.” At some point it is up to Bloomberg to show something. It isn’t possible to show a negative in this case.

Well the article doesn't mention how or what was tested. The article doesn't really state what they tested for... Did they swing a dead chicken over the board while chanting "Evils reveal yourself", did they decap chips? Did they just install trend-micro antivirus and let it run?
Post reply on HN