Re: Post : INTEL’S SECURITY FLAW IS NO FLAW

Top Page
Attachments:
Message as email
+ (text/plain)
+ (text/html)
+ (text/plain)
Delete this message
Reply to this message
Author: Aaron Jones
Date:  
To: Main PLUG discussion list
Subject: Re: Post : INTEL’S SECURITY FLAW IS NO FLAW
We had a silent helicopter we used in Vietnam to tap wires in cambodia.

We tapped wires miles under water during the cold war.

Russia built a listening device that used the vibrations of speech to power it and hid it in a wooden award given to a diplomat. It was found because his maid accidentally broke it.

In the 80s and 90s we used lasers aimed at glass to measure ems from monitors.

We have some awesome stories from every conflict on the planet. We have THE defacto military on the planet. We have enough weapons to kill every one on earth multiple times over.

But you don't believe someone could be tasked with purposefully adding a back door to some code 20 years ago during some fab work?

Just to get that straight?

> On Jan 11, 2018, at 10:10 AM, Mark Phillips <> wrote:
>
> No, I don't work at Intel. I am, however, not a believer in all the government conspiracy theories floating around the Internet.
>
> Mark
>
>> On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 9:25 AM, Aaron Jones <> wrote:
>> Signals intelligence is believed to have been birthed in 1904.
>>
>> But exploiting hardware isn't new. For military, police, or criminal intentions.
>>
>> You work at Intel Mark? Lol
>>
>>> On Jan 11, 2018, at 9:11 AM, Mark Phillips <> wrote:
>>>
>>
>>> There is no conspiracy here. 23 years ago no one thought about attack vectors and how to take over machines. It is only recently that we are all sensitized to this problem. Even though the tech world is sensitized to the nature of exploits, companies still ship brand new products (e.g. Nest, cars, etc.) that can be exploited by almost anyone. It was only recently that router and switch companies stopped using admin and admin as login credentials!
>>>
>>> Your argument that these new CPU exploits are a government conspiracy can be applied to any potential exploit discovered today in a piece of code written yesterday.
>>>
>>> Mark
>>>
>>>> On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 9:02 AM, Carruth, Rusty <> wrote:
>>>> As mentioned earlier, I've done my share of ... um, looking for flaws in design of operating systems back when I was in college. (What, 1976?)
>>>>
>>>> We discovered some bad flaws in the design of the <redacted>. How long had the Univac been around? I don't know, but a while. Unless someone with WAY too much time on their hands is actively seeking ways around stuff, there's only so much 'bug' you can find. (and, actually, you really need more than one person involved (partially so someone can ask the 'right' stupid question :-))
>>>>
>>>> Doesn't take malice or sloppiness, and I will say being a publicly-traded company makes it very hard to spend the time required to even start on the hacking required (Being publically-traded makes your owner effectively insane, since your owner is actually many people, all with different and often diametrically opposing goals for the company).
>>>>
>>>> Anyway, tell you what - go read the Intel hardware docs and see if you can find the info needed to put together to see the bug. And this with prior knowledge of where to look.
>>>>
>>>> I will say that this doesn't excuse much, but realize that being a public company drives you insane ;-)
>>>>
>>>> Rusty
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: PLUG-discuss [mailto:plug-discuss-bounces@lists.phxlinux.org] On Behalf Of
>>>> Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2018 8:42 AM
>>>> To: Main PLUG discussion list
>>>> Subject: Re: Post : INTEL’S SECURITY FLAW IS NO FLAW
>>>>
>>>> ...
>>>>
>>>> I've read these issues may have persisted as far back as 1995. How does
>>>> that happen? How does an army of engineers miss this for 23 years? How
>>>> do you explain that?
>>>>
>>>> That means lots of people came and went. There should have been lots of
>>>> QA... for 23 years.
>>>>
>>>> How does this happen? Only two ways I can see 1) sloppy work, or 2)
>>>> intentionally.
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------
>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list -
>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
>>>> http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------
>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list -
>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
>>> http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------
>> PLUG-discuss mailing list -
>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
>> http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>
> ---------------------------------------------------
> PLUG-discuss mailing list -
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
> http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss

---------------------------------------------------
PLUG-discuss mailing list -
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.phxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss