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

How Purism avoids Intel’s Active Management Technology

puri.sm

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 121 posts

Re: How Purism avoids Intel’s Active Management Technology

#71

Post by akimball »

selectodude wrote: post #63
threatripper wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Absence of evidence is not the evidence for absence. If the backdoor exists you will need to know a secret to open it. Currently, the public obviously doesn't know this secret or the doors would be wide open for virtually anybody. Because we don't know the secret key, we cannot open them to prove that they exist. So we don't know for sure if the backdoors exist. But the way the IME is designed and handled makes it po…

>It's up to Intel to prove that they don't exist. That seems a bit over the top to ask them to prove a negative.

It would be easy for Intel to prove what code is running. Peer review does the rest.

Re: How Purism avoids Intel’s Active Management Technology

#72

Post by numpad0 »

Godel_unicode wrote: post #58
NikolaNovak wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's certainly one of those "acquired tastes", though like with 3.5mm elimination, I don't understand the sheer vitriol against it by those who happen not to use it. Why do you care? If everything else in Thinkpad appealed to you, why would an eminently ignorable feature be such a HUGE ("single reason") deal breaker? In my mind, either a) There are other reasons and this is a convenient conscious or subconscious scap…

The trackpoint is ugly. It's a giant throwback pimple in the middle of the keyboard, which there's no way to get around looking at all the time. Thinkpads being ugly is kind of their thing, so it doesn't surprise me that lots of Thinkpad people don't mind it or even see it as a plus, but to me seeing a trackpoint is like seeing a floppy drive. I used one for years, and I'm really happy that trackpads have gotten good…

I feel TrackPoint and Trackpad both present at the same time is ugly

But FWIW the inspiration for the red cap is from pickled plum in bento boxes[0] so

[0]: https://images.app.goo.gl/Xf3kHjv9JVMdeXA77

Re: How Purism avoids Intel’s Active Management Technology

#73

Post by closeparen »

stallmanite wrote: post #70
rzzzt wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your computer could run Linux or Doom even while it's off!

The idea of gaining control of the management hardware like this is really exciting. Can anyone here comment on whether it could plausibly happen? I’m guessing it would require leaks from Intel because otherwise whoever develops the capability would presumably keep it close to the vest or sell it for major $ right?

I just mean, rather than leaving your computer with a powerful remote administration system un-configured & ready to go with a default password, provision it yourself, set the passwords, maybe even use it.

Re: How Purism avoids Intel’s Active Management Technology

#74

Post by nonesuchluck »

closeparen wrote: post #28

I hear a lot about disabling the management engines... what about activating them for yourself?

You can easily use AMT on your own PCs, with fully open source software. Just go set a remote access password in your boot settings, and download control client from https://www.meshcommander.com/

Re: How Purism avoids Intel’s Active Management Technology

#75

Post by searchableguy »

numpad0 wrote: post #72
Godel_unicode wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The trackpoint is ugly. It's a giant throwback pimple in the middle of the keyboard, which there's no way to get around looking at all the time. Thinkpads being ugly is kind of their thing, so it doesn't surprise me that lots of Thinkpad people don't mind it or even see it as a plus, but to me seeing a trackpoint is like seeing a floppy drive. I used one for years, and I'm really happy that trackpads have gotten good…

I feel TrackPoint and Trackpad both present at the same time is ugly But FWIW the inspiration for the red cap is from pickled plum in bento boxes[0] so [0]: https://images.app.goo.gl/Xf3kHjv9JVMdeXA77

> But FWIW the inspiration for the red cap is from pickled plum in bento boxes

I get now why so many anime people love thinkpads.

Re: How Purism avoids Intel’s Active Management Technology

#76

Post by pastrami_panda »

Eldandan wrote: post #60
pastrami_panda wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A bit harsh, but sure, once you go 16:10 it's very hard to go back to 16:9 laptops.

I've been able to make the adjustment by buying something with a slightly larger display. A 13" 16:10 display is comparable to 14" 16:9. At 1080p/1200p you lose some vertical pixels and a very tiny amount of physical vertical length, but you gain horizontal pixels and length, along with potentially more ports. This was my recent experience choosing between a new XPS 13 or a T14s amd. Side by side the screens weren't…

I can't really stay productive on anything less than 15". Right now I'm currently enjoying this years lineup of 17" laptops whose body is basically what a 15" was some years ago. I do graphics and sound production aside from programming so I'm really enjoying the extreme screen-to-body ratios. Vapor chamber cooling is also a nice addition.

But the thing that really gets me is the 16:10 resolution, I could personally never go back after using it, it just feels correct (to me).

Re: How Purism avoids Intel’s Active Management Technology

#77

Post by corty »

cantrevealname wrote: post #45
rcxdude wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There have been two really severe AMT vulnerabilities (basically allowing complete takeover of the PC through the network). These have been patched and no widescale exploitation of them has been reported AFAIK. The other vulnerabilities essentially allow for a super-rootkit: if you can get arbitrary code execution in the AMT from the OS then you can escalate an exploit into a rootkit which is basically impossible to…

> severe AMT vulnerabilities (basically allowing complete takeover of the PC through the network) Does this mean when the PC was connected by ethernet cable? Even by wifi? The exploit could have worked by visiting an arbitrary website? With no click? (I’m not being skeptical. I just want to understand what’s required for the exploit to work.)

When the computer is off: WiFi would also work if it were configured with an ESSID and credentials. But usually, most people dont't do this.

When it is on: AMT Wifi might also just piggyback on the existing config of the OS.

Re: How Purism avoids Intel’s Active Management Technology

#78

Post by kybernetikos »

Godel_unicode wrote: post #58
NikolaNovak wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's certainly one of those "acquired tastes", though like with 3.5mm elimination, I don't understand the sheer vitriol against it by those who happen not to use it. Why do you care? If everything else in Thinkpad appealed to you, why would an eminently ignorable feature be such a HUGE ("single reason") deal breaker? In my mind, either a) There are other reasons and this is a convenient conscious or subconscious scap…

The trackpoint is ugly. It's a giant throwback pimple in the middle of the keyboard, which there's no way to get around looking at all the time. Thinkpads being ugly is kind of their thing, so it doesn't surprise me that lots of Thinkpad people don't mind it or even see it as a plus, but to me seeing a trackpoint is like seeing a floppy drive. I used one for years, and I'm really happy that trackpads have gotten good…

There is no better way of controlling a mouse when you have limited elbow room. It also keeps your hands nearer the keys.

Re: How Purism avoids Intel’s Active Management Technology

#79

Post by numpad0 »

boring_twenties wrote: post #39
floatboth wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Either like the HAP bit, or less — only disabling its visibility to the OS on the PCIe bus.

Yeah, I'm a little confused as to why they'd bother implementing and deploying this feature without even a cursory explanation of what it does...

Maybe it’s literally classified

Re: How Purism avoids Intel’s Active Management Technology

#80

Post by wmf »

stallmanite wrote: post #70
rzzzt wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your computer could run Linux or Doom even while it's off!

The idea of gaining control of the management hardware like this is really exciting. Can anyone here comment on whether it could plausibly happen? I’m guessing it would require leaks from Intel because otherwise whoever develops the capability would presumably keep it close to the vest or sell it for major $ right?

The ME is running Minix/x86 and presumably a vulnerability could be used to inject new code that isn't signed by Intel.

But what would you do with it? Why not just use the OS?

Post reply on HN