Amazon Has Pulled Ads From Bloomberg Over Controversial 'Big Hack' Chinese Spy Story; Apple Has Not Invited Outlet's Reporters To a Product Event Next Week (buzzfeednews.com)

Both Amazon and Apple are taking retributive measures against Bloomberg, which in a report earlier this month alleged that some motherboards used by these companies were hacked by China. From a report: Amazon pulled its fourth quarter advertisements on Bloomberg's website, a move some within the media giant think is retribution for its controversial story alleging that Chinese spies hacked into the online retailer's servers. According to a source in position to know, Amazon's digital media buyer, Initiative, informed Bloomberg's sales staff on October 16 that it would cancel its ad buys for the fourth quarter due to budget cuts. Internally, the source said, the staff received that decision, made only eight days after a previous communication with Initiative confirming that the ads would run, as a direct response to Amazon's displeasure over the October 4 story. (Amazon announced Thursday that its marketing expenses for Q3 2018 were 3.3 billion dollars, up more than 800 million dollars from the year before.) [...] According to multiple sources, Bloomberg was not invited to Apple's fall product event next week in Brooklyn. Further reading: In an Unprecedented Move, Apple CEO Tim Cook Calls For Bloomberg To Retract Its Chinese Spy Chip Story.

Comments

This story was reported widely in Feb of 2017

[supercell]

This Supermicro server/security story was reported in 2017, although focused on Apple (said others were impacted, no specific mention of Amazon), since it was not highly profiled by Bloomberg Business News, it was not widely noticed.

Feb 2017
https://appleinsider.com/artic...
https://www.macrumors.com/2017...
https://arstechnica.com/civis/...

Their claims that they knew nothing of this security issue from Supermicro has all the appererances of a PR cover up

Re:This story was reported widely in Feb of 2017

[Junta]

No, *that* was a problem of failing to provide adequate protection of their servers and download site from fake firmware. From all reports, this was enough to scare Apple off as a customer, but didn't actually get anywhere to have a chance to actually infiltrate anything. This is a class of attack that can be mitigated, and it is correct to select a different vendor for having better security practices to prevent an external attacker that has no business relationship with the supplier from getting in.

Bloomberg's accusation is that there was a *hardware* attack where a chip was injected and that the attack actually landed and spent a significant time having compromised the datacenters.

This is a whole different implication:
-An entity with a business relationship vetted by the supplier would have been the one to execute, suggesting the supplier is at best inadequate in vetting their partners and at worst (and the bloomberg *heavily* hints it this in mildly racist ways) complicit in the attack.
-Such an attack landed successfully for a significant duration.

As a few have pointed out, the far safer bet would be a firmware attack, as with the alleged approach it would be far more expensive, less likely to hit, and upon detection has no plausible deniability. The artcile smells fishy, and no other investigation can find a hint of anything to corroborate the claims.

More recent research

[SuperKendall]

The thing is, just recently LOTS of news orgs, and the government itself could find no evidence of what was reported - and both Apple and Amazon did not just give PR responses, but much stronger responses that would lead to large fines if they were lying.

Since everyone else on Earth is unable to verify the story, it's far more likely Bloomburg really screwed up.

Re:Kohath you're a fucking moron lol.

[Kohath]

It's almost certainly not intentionally false and provably motivated by malice. If the story is merely false, it isn't (legally) libel.