Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

AMD Has No Plans To Release PSP Code (twitch.tv)

Posted by msmash on from the no-change-of-heart dept.

AMD has faced calls from Edward Snowden, Libreboot and the Reddit community to release the source code to the AMD Secure Processor (PSP), a network-capable co-processor which some believe has the capacity to act as a backdoor. But despite some signs earlier that it might consider opening the PSP code at some point, the chip-maker has now confirmed that there hasn't been a change of heart yet. "We have no plans on releasing it to the public," the company executives said in a tech talk (video).

63 of 125 comments (clear)

  1. Lisa Su is BAE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    PSP stands for Platform Security Processor, a secure enclave in the processor and AMD's version of the Intel Management Engine.

    Quoting from Libreboot:

    As such, it has the ability to hide its own program code, scratch RAM, and any data it may have taken and stored from the lesser-privileged x86 system RAM (kernel encryption keys, login data, browsing history, keystrokes, who knows!). To make matters worse, the PSP theoretically has access to the entire system memory space (AMD either will not or cannot deny this, and it would seem to be required to allow the DRM “features” to work as intended), which means that it has at minimum MMIO-based access to the network controllers and any other PCI/PCIe peripherals installed on the system.

    AMD is no doubt being bitten on the sack for using third parts code and we again see why everything should be open sources.

    1. Re:Lisa Su is BAE by sl3xd · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Seems odd that anybody would go down the route of obscurity, given the recent exposure of Intel AMT, and the problems it is causing.

      it would seem to be required to allow the DRM “features” to work as intended

      Odd to "protect" the use of DRM, given the track record of successful hacks against DRM. Even worse to compromise the security of the entire system for its sake.

      I see nothing that could possibly go wrong...

      --
      -- Sometimes you have to turn the lights off in order to see.
    2. Re:Lisa Su is BAE by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 3, Insightful

      There's two reasons I can think of offhand why they wouldn't want to release the sourcecode:

      1. They don't want to make it any easier than necessary for hackers to find a way to exploit this
      2. They don't want the general public to know exactly how much any system using this hardware compromises their privacy and personal security

      As-is, I'd say that any computer using this technology is about as compromised as it can get, nothing you'd ever do on it would even be remotely secure, not unless it was never, ever connected to any network that has any route to the public Internet. The only way they could make something like this worse would be to somehow prevent any OS other than Windows to run on it, ensuring that you never, ever have any control over anything that isn't trivial.

      In the past I've said "computers aren't fun anymore", but when I said that previously I meant it in a totally different way than I do when I say it now; between hardware manufacturers, designing in hardware that allows for outside surveillance and control of a computer you ostensibly own, and shithead companies like Microsoft, who produce entire operating systems with surveillance-and-control completely integrated into every piece of code, computers are now worse than "no fun anymore", they're spiritually cancerous. As if that isn't all bad enough, now Microsoft is attempting to annex and subvert Linux, too, trying to bring it's further development under their control, and running half-assed versions of it under Windows, effectively removing all the advantages, security, and privacy.

      If I even cared anymore I guess I'd go play with microcontrollers. Until, that is, they manage to ruin that for everyone, too.

    3. Re:Lisa Su is BAE by Fwipp · · Score: 3, Interesting

      3. They're using proprietary code from a third-party that they're not allowed to disclose.

    4. Re:Lisa Su is BAE by smallfries · · Score: 2

      4. There is zero commercial advantage in releasing the source.

      --
      Slashdot: where don knuth is an idiot because he cant grasp the awesome power of php
    5. Re:Lisa Su is BAE by ArchieBunker · · Score: 1

      Intel. Or more likely whoever owns the IP for the management processor.

      --
      Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
    6. Re:Lisa Su is BAE by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

      Sure. There's also 'zero commercial advantage' to not jacking up the price of Epi pens by a gazillion percent, and just look how well-received that was!

    7. Re:Lisa Su is BAE by Anon+E.+Muss · · Score: 4, Insightful

      4. There is zero commercial advantage in releasing the source.

      I'm not so sure about that. I think with proper marketing AMD could turn it into a major commercial advantage. Imagine the ad campaign...

      AMD chips don't spy on you, and we can prove it.
      Intel is hiding behind lawyers and refusing to come clean.
      Which one do you want inside your computer?

      (Unfortunately, "proper marketing" and "AMD" are rarely used in the same sentence.)

      --
      The key sequence to access my Slashdot bookmark in Firefox is Alt-B-S. I don't believe this is a coincidence.
    8. Re:Lisa Su is BAE by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 4, Informative

      5. There really is a backdoor.

    9. Re:Lisa Su is BAE by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

      That's pretty much a given, anymore.

    10. Re:Lisa Su is BAE by sexconker · · Score: 1

      It's ARM.

    11. Re:Lisa Su is BAE by Aaden42 · · Score: 1

      Honestly, I have a doubt it's third party code that's holding them back. I'd lay even odds on a polite reminder from a Three Letter Agency was all it took to scuttle any plans of revealing their backdoor source code.

    12. Re:Lisa Su is BAE by Kjella · · Score: 1

      You mean just like Linux crushed Windows and macOS on the desktop when they did the same? Oh, wait...

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
  2. The distrust only grows from here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Closed source, out of band co-processors on every motherboard currently in production with no oversight or accountability? I'm surprised we don't have a third party stepping up here, like Samsung or Qualcomm, ready to take a crack at the CPU market with this kind of an opportunity.

    1. Re: The distrust only grows from here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You are kidding right? The base band chip in mobile phones would make intel and amd look like amateurs with what samsung and qualcomm can do.

    2. Re:The distrust only grows from here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      >I'm surprised we don't have a third party stepping up here, like Samsung or Qualcomm

      If both Intel and AMD have this sort of thing baked into their hardware then I'd guess that either A) there's some sort of business/financial incentive for them to do so, or B) there's a lot of pressure from certain TLAs to do so. Either way, I can't see why the same pressure(s) wouldn't drive a third party to do the exact same thing, and that's before you ask yourself how sure you are that they aren't doing it already on their non-PC CPU products.

    3. Re:The distrust only grows from here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      "oh sure i dont care i will just switch it off"

      "wait, i need it on to watch hbo go?"

      "ok here take all my privacy i just want to watch game of thrones"

    4. Re:The distrust only grows from here by iCEBaLM · · Score: 2

      Where do you think they get the co-processors from? AMD's PSP is some ARM variant, could be qualcomm for all we know.

    5. Re:The distrust only grows from here by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      I'm surprised we don't have a third party stepping up here

      We did. For years 3rd parties made lots of money selling these as extras on every server or high end workstation. Now that everyone gets it for "free" people are upset.

    6. Re:The distrust only grows from here by Waccoon · · Score: 1

      I'm surprised we don't have a third party stepping up here, like Samsung or Qualcomm, ready to take a crack at the CPU market with this kind of an opportunity.

      They'd do better... especially Qualcomm?

  3. No PSP code by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    But DS code is allowed

  4. Re:"the Reddit community" by Suiggy · · Score: 1

    Huh? What's wrong with you, are you an icky weirdo or something? I bet you don't have a facebook either or watch television at least 20 hours per week. That's sooooo creepy.

  5. Proof by kelanos · · Score: 1

    Proof that it is a backdoor and that the crucial support of their business is a contract from the plutocracy, meaning that if they stop playing ball, they go out of business.

    1. Re:Proof by Wootery · · Score: 1

      Except that's conspiracy-theory reasoning. They might just figure that not enough people care to bother.

    2. Re:Proof by StormReaver · · Score: 5, Informative

      Except that's conspiracy-theory reasoning.

      If we've learned anything in the last five years or so, it's that's yesterday's wacko conspiracy theory is today's jaw-dropping, fact-checked revelation.

    3. Re:Proof by Wootery · · Score: 1

      No, don't be absurd.

      The 9/11 truthers? Just as stupid today as they were yesterday.

    4. Re:Proof by Wootery · · Score: 1

      they could get an edge over intel if they would open source theirs when intel never would

      But like I said, very few people really seem to care. You explanation isn't proof, it's one possible explanation.

      PS you're fucking stupid

      What a compelling argument!

    5. Re:Proof by Wootery · · Score: 1

      they don't care about their secrets?

      Well apparently not, no. Slashdot might care about this stuff (myself included), but as far as I can tell no-one else really does.

      Alternative architectures like ARM exist, and projects like RISC-V exist, and I think they're great, but I don't see them having a big impact on the CPUs that real people buy for day-to-day workstations and servers. Maybe that's cynical, but here we are.

      seriously, you are stupid

      Try arguing like an adult, rather than a petulant toddler.

  6. Ok, next! by Opportunist · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Another chip manufacturer that cannot be used for trustworthy IT infrastructure. Who's next on the chopping block?

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    1. Re:Ok, next! by TFlan91 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What chip manufacturer is trustworthy?

    2. Re:Ok, next! by grumpy-cowboy · · Score: 5, Funny

      Lay's, Humpty Dumpty, Yum Yum,...

      --
      Will $CURRENT_YEAR be the year of the Linux Desktop?
    3. Re:Ok, next! by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

      Then you have two choices: Either some obscure 3rd-tier company, probably Chinese, who at best is hiding their backdoors, or expensive FPGAs, and you learn to 'roll your own' microprocessor that way. Or, used equipment wherever you can find it.

      I suppose you could also set up your firewalls to prevent any 'phone home' from occurring, but like Windows 10, it might have so many different ways to do that, that you'd be playing an endless game of Whack-a-Mole trying to lock it out.

    4. Re:Ok, next! by tlhIngan · · Score: 4, Informative

      Another chip manufacturer that cannot be used for trustworthy IT infrastructure. Who's next on the chopping block?

      Better get rid of ARM, too, since ARM has the same thing.

      In fact, I believe AMD licensed ARM's technology for it - it's called TrustZone, and it separates out threads of execution into "secure" and "open" modes. Your regular OS runs in the "open" mode, and makes calls into the secure OS, which can be used to keep stuff like encryption keys away from the main OS. (You can use it for disk encryption - get the secure OS to generate a key, save it, and load the encryption key into the onboard encryption hardware, so none of the user software touches it. If you rip out the disk, it's useless because the key is locked away).

      Several DRM schemes also use it, including Google's Widevine DRM (requires it in order to work).

      And yes, the secure OS has full access to the main OS and all the peripherals.

      The boot chain must be strictly controlled - you have to start with a onboard ROM monitor that verifies the images as they load before transferring control the open world OS. Otherwise you can load any code you want. I'm not sure how AMD processors boot, but all ARM processors using TrustZone have a boot ROM that verifies the next stage bootloaders (and secure OS) before loading them into memory.

    5. Re:Ok, next! by grumpy-cowboy · · Score: 2

      QC, Canada

      --
      Will $CURRENT_YEAR be the year of the Linux Desktop?
    6. Re:Ok, next! by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 2

      The POWER8 and POWER9 by IBM are completely open. See also: https://www.raptorcs.com/TALOS...

      --
      Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    7. Re:Ok, next! by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      used for trustworthy IT infrastructure

      Infrastructure is exactly the kind of IT that has had these exact things for 2 decades. Just built into the motherboard instead of the CPU.

    8. Re:Ok, next! by Roman+Mamedov · · Score: 1

      Snatch up AMD's Bulldozer/Piledriver FX series CPUs, used or on sales, those are the last and to date fastest remaining x86 CPU without Intel ME or AMD PSP backdoors.

    9. Re:Ok, next! by KiloByte · · Score: 1

      That code is loadable, and depending on the boot chain you may or may not be able to replace it. And you do get the source -- at least to the reference version, your machine's vendor may load something else there.

      --
      The creatures outside looked from Alt-Right to Antifa; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
    10. Re: Ok, next! by that+this+is+not+und · · Score: 1

      There aren't really open source development tools for "expensive fpgas". That is a fairly closed world.

  7. Leaks are Worse, Fellas by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Go ahead, try to keep this stuff secret. There will be leakers and if you will be embarrassed by the leaks, it's better to come clean now than to be the center of market turmoil when the vulnerabilities are disclosed.

    --
    My God, it's Full of Source!
    OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  8. Can't this stuff be sniffed out? by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

    Just watch your network traffic, right? And those with really fancy tools can measure all the pin outs?

    --
    “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    1. Re:Can't this stuff be sniffed out? by Megane · · Score: 1

      I think the best thing you can do is don't plug anything into the integrated Ethernet port (or on-chip WiFi if it has that). You know that its built-in spyware knows all about how to use that. It's trickier to do that on a laptop, but a USB Ethernet will at least be much more trouble for it to spy on.

      --
      #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
  9. Intel Management Engine by Jack+Greenbaum · · Score: 1

    This is the same topic as for the Intel Management Engine, for example Is the Intel Management Engine a backdoor?

  10. So I have no plan to use AMD processors by grumpy-cowboy · · Score: 2

    Period.

    --
    Will $CURRENT_YEAR be the year of the Linux Desktop?
    1. Re:So I have no plan to use AMD processors by iCEBaLM · · Score: 1

      Alright, so whose processors are you using? Intel has the IME which is the exact same thing, and has already been compromised once.

    2. Re:So I have no plan to use AMD processors by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

      So what's next for you? Waiting for the 8-core Raspberry Pi 5?

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
    3. Re:So I have no plan to use AMD processors by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      raspis don't function without blobs so that's no solution either...

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    4. Re:So I have no plan to use AMD processors by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

      Intel Core 2 Quad?

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
    5. Re:So I have no plan to use AMD processors by OrangeTide · · Score: 4, Interesting

      POWER9 is open. Not free in the sense of RISC-V or SPARC, but at least it's not based on mysterious binary blobs and undocumented coprocessors like the options from RPi/Broadcom, Intel and AMD.

      --
      “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
    6. Re:So I have no plan to use AMD processors by Hobart · · Score: 1

      POWER9 is open.

      What's the least expensive POWER9 system an individual or small business can buy?

      --
      o/~ Join us now and share the software ...
  11. Can this be contained or rendered inert? by Zombie+Ryushu · · Score: 3, Interesting

    With the Intel AMT Platform, it is possible to render it "inert" such that yes its there, yes its running, but it won't accept any connections from the outside world. There is a Linux utility for checking if AMT is working or not. But Linux can't turn it on.

    The problem is if you have Windows installed, Windows CAN re-activate it, and remotely. Can the AMD PSP be rendered harmless by containment, to where when Running Linux, it is non-functional because Windows utilities aren't there to re-activate it?

  12. Re:In theory, yes. In practice, no. by TheSunborn · · Score: 2

    Funny but no. With https you can still see the target, so it would be easy to detect if someone opened a https connection to a server which the user newer visited.

    But the danger is not that Intel/AMD is going to spy on anyone, because neither company is THAT stupid. The danger is if there is a bug which allow third party code running on the computer, to interfere with the code running on the PSP.

  13. Re: No Plans to buy their backdoored hardware then by Miamicanes · · Score: 1

    Robust firmware-signing isn't the problem... robust firmware-signing that requires a key not under your own control is the problem.

    That's my #1 beef with Android... Google is happy to bitch about my unlocked bootloader, but forces me to choose between leaving it unlocked, or locking it WITH THEIR FIRMWARE ONLY. I want to be able to flash my own firmware AND re-lock the bootloader with MY OWN key.

    It's also why I don't particularly object to things like AACS implemented directly by a discrete codec chip, but hate when mfrs. rely on the OS & CPU to enforce it. If it's embedded in the codec chip, I can ignore its existence and just not use it. If it depends on the CPU for implementation, the mfr. is going to try and lock down the entire device. It's the difference between being forced to own a black box you can bury in a hole in the back yard & ignore, vs living in a police state where you're forced to live IN a black box under somebody else's control.

  14. Re:Dude *(BOTH) TRUSTZONE* *Samsung KNOX* by BlueStrat · · Score: 2

    The only real way out of this is either a new startup company catering to exactly 'our' crowd, or crowdfunding a desktop RISCV/J[2,4,6]/OpenSparc motherboard and processor combo (SOCKETED, not solder down. Lose a few watts, leave open future upgrades/replacements.)

    The only way you'd be able to do that successfully would be to have your own nuclear-capable nation-state, and even then it would be dicey at best. All the 'Five-Eyes' nations and most of the rest of the West would be out to destroy such a project and those behind it. The governments of the West seem determined to weaken global network/computer security in order to be able to spy on anyone at any time for any reason, and damn the consequences.

    Thank goodness my plans for the impending overthrow of Western civilization do not require secure networks or hardware.

    Strat

    --
    Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
  15. Re:Not popular enough. by erapert · · Score: 1

    I care. But I know as much about building CPUs and getting them to work as I do about brain surgery: none.
    I'm rooting for you guys, though. Is there a place I can go to donate some money?

  16. Re: Seriously... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

    Sigh, switched to telling corny jokes to get some karma back I guess. Leave.

    1) I don't need points for my Excellent Karma. 2) Have some Portuguese Spam.

  17. Re:"the Reddit community" by SharpFang · · Score: 1

    You know, that's argument ad hominem. It really doesn't matter *who* makes the argument; what matters is the merit of the argument. The argument is that security through obscurity isn't any good. It's an argument every security expert will agree with. In this case it's been already proven to be a vulnerability, in case of Intel. There's no valid defense AMD can use to defend their approach. ...so, for lack of valid defenses, let's use ad hominem...

    --
    45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
  18. Re:"the Reddit community" by jellomizer · · Score: 1

    Yes it is.
    But in the eyes of the company, those groups are considered fringe groups, people who have wider agendas.

    --
    If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
  19. Closed source means likely backdoored by gweihir · · Score: 2

    That really is the only sane conclusion.

    --
    Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
  20. Talos II is coming by jbn-o · · Score: 4, Informative

    According to https://www.raptorcs.com/TALOS... Raptor Engineering is working on Talos II. They claim it "Libre-friendly, powerful, and competitively priced the new, POWER9-based Talos II takes flight in early August 2017!" so not long to wait before we can evaluate the specs and price. Debian GNU/Linux has a POWER9 port which I'd expect would run on such hardware.

    --
    Digital Citizen
  21. Who cares about the code? by Trogre · · Score: 1

    I don't care about the code. I just want to know how to turn it off.

    Seriously, what's a decent bypass for this? Ignore the onboard LAN and use an oddball gigabit NIC for which the PSP couldn't possibly have a driver?

    --
    "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
  22. Re:"the Reddit community" by SharpFang · · Score: 1

    Well, I'm going to express my vote through my wallet. I'm not a fringe group - I'm a potential customer. A potential customer they have lost.

    --
    45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
  23. Re: Seriously... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

    Man, you eat that?

    Nope. Someone was complaining about Spam and Spam comes in a lot of flavors.

    Can I mail you some of these?>

    Sure. I could always use an extra set of bed sheets.