Slashdot Mirror
EFF Warns Most Of Intel's Chipsets Contain 'A Security Hazard' (eff.org)
The EFF is issuing a warning about the "tiny homunculus computer" in most of Intel's chipsets -- the largely-undocumented "Management Engine" which houses more than just the AMT module. An anonymous reader quotes their report:
While AMT can be disabled, there is presently no way to disable or limit the Management Engine in general. Intel urgently needs to provide one....vulnerabilities in any of the other modules could be as bad, if not worse, for security. Some of the other modules include hardware-based authentication code and a system for location tracking and remote wiping of laptops for anti-theft purposes... It should be up to hardware owners to decide if this code will be installed in their computers or not. Perhaps most alarmingly, there is also reportedly a DRM module that is actively working against the user's interests, and should never be installed in a Management Engine by default...
While Intel may put a lot of effort into hunting for security bugs, vulnerabilities will inevitably exist, and having them lurking in a highly privileged, low-level component with no OS visibility or reliable logging is a nightmare for defensive cybersecurity. The design choice of putting a secretive, unmodifiable management chip in every computer was terrible, and leaving their customers exposed to these risks without an opt-out is an act of extreme irresponsibility... EFF believes that Intel needs to provide a minimum level of transparency and user control of the Management Engines inside our computers, in order to prevent this cybersecurity disaster from recurring. Unless that happens, we are concerned that it may not be appropriate to use Intel CPUs in many kinds of critical infrastructure systems.
TLDR: "We have reason to fear that the undocumented master controller inside our Intel chips could continue to be a source of serious vulnerabilities in personal computers, servers, and critical cybersecurity and physical infrastructure."
While Intel may put a lot of effort into hunting for security bugs, vulnerabilities will inevitably exist, and having them lurking in a highly privileged, low-level component with no OS visibility or reliable logging is a nightmare for defensive cybersecurity. The design choice of putting a secretive, unmodifiable management chip in every computer was terrible, and leaving their customers exposed to these risks without an opt-out is an act of extreme irresponsibility... EFF believes that Intel needs to provide a minimum level of transparency and user control of the Management Engines inside our computers, in order to prevent this cybersecurity disaster from recurring. Unless that happens, we are concerned that it may not be appropriate to use Intel CPUs in many kinds of critical infrastructure systems.
TLDR: "We have reason to fear that the undocumented master controller inside our Intel chips could continue to be a source of serious vulnerabilities in personal computers, servers, and critical cybersecurity and physical infrastructure."
AMD has a similar feature. the FSF warned about these backdoors in both
Intel and AMD CPUs a while ago. I think the said the last processor made
without this "backdoor" was an AMD processor made in 2011.
".. presently no way to disable or limit the Management Engine in general.
Now this is the feature that screams of interference by a spy agency. If this feature was for Management, then YOU COULD MANAGE IT!
It would be turned off by default. You could turn it off. You could permanently disable it. I have been asking for these capabilities for years. I know I am not the only one. When I talk to other security folks and IT admins, the majority of them want to be able to manage and control the possibility of remote management.
As a member of the audience, if I am going to be buying a chipset then who do I buy it from if I want to talk with my wallet? Aren't Intel and AMD pretty much the only games in town?
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
AMD actually goes even further with TrustZone, literally implementing a full arm core on die.
If you don't want a backdoor in your processor, you'll need to use an ancient processor.
But fortuitiously, for the 95% of us who aren't ardent gamers, aren't bitcoin miners, and aren't wrangling huge data bases, ancient processors should be more than adequate. A 386SX16 might be a bit lightweight for playing cat videos. But a 15 year old VIA C5 will do a surprising amount of the things people actually want to do about as well as more modern CPUs.
What are you smoking? A 15 year old VIA C5 would barely run java with decent performance. Load any web page today and there are over 25 java scripts being run in the background. The only thing that saved java was the increase in CPU power. Core 2 CPUs from 2006/2007 (about 10 years ago) would be the bare minimum.
Your are so wrong it's not even funny. The intel ME is included in every single Intel chip produced since 2008. If you own an Intel computer that you haven't had since before Obama was president your computer is vulnerable. Period. There is no doubt about this and it's fully acknowledged and published in all the releases from Intel about this vulnerability. It's remotely executable and the code to do so is live in the hacker community.