zlacker

[return to "Intel x86 considered harmful – survey of attacks against x86 over last 10 years"]
1. Animat+Xu[view] [source] 2015-10-27 18:52:03
>>chei0a+(OP)
There just have to be backdoors built into the Intel Management Engine. Intel won't disclose what code it executes, so we have to assume there's a backdoor. The question is, whose backdoor.

It would be useful to install some honeypot machines which would appear to be interesting to governments (an ISIS bulletin board, for example) and record every packet going in and out.

◧◩
2. nickps+wJ[view] [source] 2015-10-27 21:08:06
>>Animat+Xu
This is why I laugh about people here that laugh about backdoors in their TRNG, etc. Intel's been backdoored for AMT, etc for a while. Those circuits, due to NRE costs, have to be in most of their chips whether they advertise them or not. They have deep read access into everything in the system with who knows what write access. We also know some of their chipsets have radios in them which might be in the others, permanently or temporarily disabled.

Just a huge black box of interconnected black boxes at least one set of which is definitely a backdoor. And worst thing is I heard it can work when the machine is entirely or somewhat powered down. (!) I don't know for sure because I won't buy one lol. The old stuff less likely to have those features works fine for me with my builds.

Gaisler's stuff and RISC-V are best hope as they're both open hardware plus getting fast. Gaisler's are already quad-core with as much I.P. as people could ever use. Anyone wanting trustworthy hardware knows where to start on building it. CheriBSD on CHERI capability processor is also open-source and can run on a high-end FPGA. So, there's that for use or copying in a Gaisler modification.

◧◩◪
3. throwa+Wl1[view] [source] 2015-10-28 09:56:27
>>nickps+wJ
> Gaisler's stuff and RISC-V are best hope as they're both open hardware plus getting fast. Gaisler's are already quad-core with as much I.P. as people could ever use. Anyone wanting trustworthy hardware knows where to start on building it. CheriBSD on CHERI capability processor is also open-source and can run on a high-end FPGA. So, there's that for use or copying in a Gaisler modification.

How can you trust the FPGA? Or the very closed-source bitstream generator necessary to compile the VHDL/Verilog code?

Assuming you want to manufacture secure processors from these designs, how can you trust the chip fab?

I'm genuinely interested, as I'm not aware of any research into protection from these issues.

[go to top]