Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Intel x86s hide another CPU that can take over your machine (you can't audit it)
Bing Bong ^ | 06/15/16 | Damien Zammit

Posted on 06/25/2016 9:26:23 PM PDT by Enlightened1

Recent Intel x86 processors implement a secret, powerful control mechanism that runs on a separate chip that no one is allowed to audit or examine. When these are eventually compromised, they'll expose all affected systems to nearly unkillable, undetectable rootkit attacks. I've made it my mission to open up this system and make free, open replacements, before it's too late.

The Intel Management Engine (ME) is a subsystem composed of a special 32-bit ARC microprocessor that's physically located inside the chipset. It is an extra general purpose computer running a firmware blob that is sold as a management system for big enterprise deployments.

When you purchase your system with a mainboard and Intel x86 CPU, you are also buying this hardware add-on: an extra computer that controls the main CPU. This extra computer runs completely out-of-band with the main x86 CPU meaning that it can function totally independently even when your main CPU is in a low power state like S3 (suspend).

On some chipsets, the firmware running on the ME implements a system called Intel's Active Management Technology (AMT). This is entirely transparent to the operating system, which means that this extra computer can do its job regardless of which operating system is installed and running on the main CPU.

The purpose of AMT is to provide a way to manage computers remotely (this is similar to an older system called "Intelligent Platform Management Interface" or IPMI, but more powerful). To achieve this task, the ME is capable of accessing any memory region without the main x86 CPU knowing about the existence of these accesses. It also runs a TCP/IP server on your network interface and packets entering and leaving your machine on certain ports bypass any firewall running on your system.

 

 

(Excerpt) Read more at boingboing.net ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Computers/Internet; Conspiracy; Science
KEYWORDS: chip; fud; intel; risk; security; vpro

1 posted on 06/25/2016 9:26:23 PM PDT by Enlightened1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Enlightened1

Linux lets this happen?


2 posted on 06/25/2016 9:34:09 PM PDT by Paladin2 (auto spelchk? BWAhaha2haaa.....I aint't likely fixin' nuttin'. Blame it on the Bossa Nova...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Enlightened1

I think I saw another thread on this, and the information I saw there made me think this is not an issue.

However I will let those of you much more knowledgeable than I comment.

I am just posting this quickly, to say wait for more information. I think this is not an issue.


3 posted on 06/25/2016 9:39:06 PM PDT by cba123 ( Toi la nguoi My. Toi bay gio o Viet Nam.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Enlightened1; dayglored; Swordmaker

Ping.


4 posted on 06/25/2016 9:41:51 PM PDT by upchuck (I'm hanging here until my Free Republic 401K is fully vested.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paladin2
Yes, because no OS can get to it on its own.

AMD has something similar, but it is optional, it is an ARM chip added in, and it doesn't have the lack of transparency Intel has kept on what it can do. For AMD, the ARM chip portion can do two things: 1) serves as a general offload device for encryption/decryption work and 2) Independently check all x86 modules for appropriate checksums of programs/modules and terminate unauthorized code, if desired. Intel's approach does program a permanent back door for remote monitoring for which you can not know this is occurring over your network or through the Internet.

This is how I understand the Intel and AMD approaches, as of today.

5 posted on 06/25/2016 9:42:23 PM PDT by ConservativeMind ("Humane" = "Don't pen up pets or eat meat, but allow infanticide, abortion, and euthanasia.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeMind
My Tomato firmware router doesn't track this tracking?

Does this additional device get a unique IP# or use the connection of the main processor(s)? MAC addresses?

6 posted on 06/25/2016 9:48:37 PM PDT by Paladin2 (auto spelchk? BWAhaha2haaa.....I aint't likely fixin' nuttin'. Blame it on the Bossa Nova...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Paladin2

MAC address. I have a Mac. :)


7 posted on 06/25/2016 9:52:39 PM PDT by JohnnyP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeMind

Does NSA know this? Snowden? Putin?


8 posted on 06/25/2016 9:52:47 PM PDT by Paladin2 (auto spelchk? BWAhaha2haaa.....I aint't likely fixin' nuttin'. Blame it on the Bossa Nova...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Paladin2

The traffic could be seen on the network, because it uses TCP/IP.

I believe the main x86 chip portion would be as blind as Windows is to a device with no driver.


9 posted on 06/25/2016 9:52:54 PM PDT by ConservativeMind ("Humane" = "Don't pen up pets or eat meat, but allow infanticide, abortion, and euthanasia.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Paladin2

This is an outgrowth of the Trusted Platform Module, as I recall.

Folks, this is not new. I believe some Intel chips have it and some don’t.


10 posted on 06/25/2016 9:54:23 PM PDT by ConservativeMind ("Humane" = "Don't pen up pets or eat meat, but allow infanticide, abortion, and euthanasia.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeMind

You can’t spell news without “new”....


11 posted on 06/25/2016 9:56:40 PM PDT by Paladin2 (auto spelchk? BWAhaha2haaa.....I aint't likely fixin' nuttin'. Blame it on the Bossa Nova...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Enlightened1

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/3440647/posts


12 posted on 06/25/2016 10:03:45 PM PDT by smokingfrog ( sleep with one eye open (<o> ---)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Enlightened1

Old news, this stuff has been around since 2008.....


13 posted on 06/25/2016 10:53:59 PM PDT by arl295
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Enlightened1

Uhn huh.

I’m trying to imagine how this works.


14 posted on 06/25/2016 11:51:57 PM PDT by Vendome (Don't take life so seriously-you won't live through it anyway - "Enjoy Yourself" ala Louis Prima)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Enlightened1

I self-identify as the Secretary of State, so this doesn’t affect me.


15 posted on 06/26/2016 4:07:43 AM PDT by ClearCase_guy (The official language of the United States should be Arabic. It's clear that our government is.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Enlightened1
...a firmware blob that is sold as a management system for big enterprise deployments.

I take this to mean No Such Agency.

16 posted on 06/26/2016 5:18:21 AM PDT by Gaffer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson