Intel platforms from 2008 onwards have a remotely exploitable security hole
1–10 of 190 posts
Re: Intel platforms from 2008 onwards have a remotely exploitable security hole
#2>>every Intel platform with AMT, ISM, and SBT from Nehalem in 2008 to Kaby Lake in 2017 has a remotely exploitable security hole in the ME (Management Engine) not CPU firmware.
>>there is literally no Intel box made in the last 9+ years that isn’t at risk
>>SemiAccurate has been begging Intel to fix this issue for literally years
Am I the only one who is so cynical to think it must have been deliberate? Intel dragging their feet for YEARS -- what could justify such a delay? The paranoid side of me asks "Were they waiting to patch this hole, until they found a different one that could be utilized?" Which begs the next quesion: Where is the NSA in all of this? It's the sort of thing that would be mighty handy to a group wishing to snoop on everyone and everything?
Last question: Why would anyone trust the encrypted management engine after this? (Why would anyone trust it before?)
>> What about embedded devices that are increasingly PC based? Digital signage perhaps? Industrial controls. HVAC. Security systems. Flight controls. Air traffic controls. Medical devices.
What, indeed? Is this the method used to interfere with Iran's nuclear program centrifuges?
Re: Intel platforms from 2008 onwards have a remotely exploitable security hole
#3My ignorance is showing, but what product lines are impacted?
Obviously things like Xeons and Core iXs, but what about things like Atom processors in tablets?
Re: Intel platforms from 2008 onwards have a remotely exploitable security hole
#4My ignorance is showing, but what product lines are impacted? Obviously things like Xeons and Core iXs, but what about things like Atom processors in tablets?
The post appears to claim that literally everything is affected, albeit probably only locally exploitable. I think that's what it means at least.
Re: Intel platforms from 2008 onwards have a remotely exploitable security hole
#5Great news that this finally came to light.
After learning about remote management capabilities I've always suspected it had holes. Large attack surface, any exploit would have a high value, and closed source.
Perhaps one day we'll be able to buy CPU's without this "feature". I'm betting AMD and ARM are in the same boat.
Re: Intel platforms from 2008 onwards have a remotely exploitable security hole
#6My ignorance is showing, but what product lines are impacted? Obviously things like Xeons and Core iXs, but what about things like Atom processors in tablets?
The post appears to claim that literally everything is affected, albeit probably only locally exploitable. I think that's what it means at least.
It claims that things with IME are (which I'm not sure if Atom has), and lists a series of architectures of which Atom isn't part. (Its architectures have different names.)
It's ambiguous if the Atom line (and which portions) might be impacted, and I would prefer someone comment directly on if Atom has ME and if so, if it was using the dangerous version (and when).
Re: Intel platforms from 2008 onwards have a remotely exploitable security hole
#7>>every Intel platform with AMT, ISM, and SBT from Nehalem in 2008 to Kaby Lake in 2017 has a remotely exploitable security hole in the ME (Management Engine) not CPU firmware. >>there is literally no Intel box made in the last 9+ years that isn’t at risk >>SemiAccurate has been begging Intel to fix this issue for literally years Am I the only one who is so cynical to think it must have been deliberate? Intel draggin…
Extending the attack surface in the name of alleged convenience seems more a plan to enable hacking than a reasonable design and marketing approach for microprocessors. IoT fanboys with an urge to make home appliances remotely exploitable might be in good faith, but Intel is smarter than them.
Re: Intel platforms from 2008 onwards have a remotely exploitable security hole
#8Zero details and zero cross references, zero mentions on Google and zero mentions in any security list I'm on. Charlie blowing nonsensical steam yet again?
Re: Intel platforms from 2008 onwards have a remotely exploitable security hole
#9Is there a better source for this than SemiAccurate? The article doesn't really have much beyond self-aggrandizement and "we can't tell you any details, but you're screwed". For something that could be anything from "Charlie Demerjian heard a rumor about a ME patch and wanted some pageviews" to the actual security apocalypse, I'd like credible sources.
Re: Intel platforms from 2008 onwards have a remotely exploitable security hole
#10The short version is that every Intel platform with AMT, ISM, and SBT from Nehalem in 2008 to Kaby Lake in 2017 has a remotely exploitable security hole in the ME (Management Engine) not CPU firmware.
We knew this would happen. We knew that the Management Engine was a backdoor, and we knew it was only a matter of time before someone would figure out how to exploit it. This is exactly the reason why Libreboot exists (https://libreboot.org/faq.html#intel). And now, far from being the tinfoil hat distro that is often portrayed, it will become a bare necessity.