zlacker

>>zdw+(OP)
Is this related to controversial Bloomberg 2021 piece about China hacking Supermicro servers?

https://www.bloomberg.com/features/2021-supermicro/

>>tiffan+yTa
Not at all, that piece described a supply chain attack replacing a component with a look-alike part analyzing tens to hundreds of gigabits if data, in a form factor so small that it wouldn't be physically possible without semiconducting fabricating processes years in advance of what existed at the time.

What this article is describing is something far more likely— a firmware attack that doesn't require specialized hardware.

>>dlcarr+EWa
Wasn’t the implant supposedly (illogically) implanting custom BMC firmware? This actually always struck me as a somewhat unbelievable part of the story: why install a hardware implant when you could just clip the flash chip and implant something without a physical trace?

>>bri3d+Z1b
The Bloomberg article specifically mentioned the attack occurring through the addition of extra hardware:

    “In early 2018, two security companies that I advise were briefed by the FBI’s counterintelligence division investigating this discovery of added malicious chips on Supermicro’s motherboards,” said Mike Janke, a former Navy SEAL who co-founded DataTribe, a venture capital firm. “These two companies were subsequently involved in the government investigation, where they used advanced hardware forensics on the actual tampered Supermicro boards to validate the existence of the added malicious chips.”