I firmly believe he was to be the wedge to Hillary's mallet that would destroy the US as we know it. Hell, he said it himself that he would fundamentally transform America.
There were so many powerful people around him in his early days, it's hard not to believe he'd been groomed.
In this case, I have a much easier time believing Intel has a bunch of greedy/spineless people who rolled over at the request of a state power. Even if BHO blessed the program it would take many months to ramp up production then test/etc.
who cares? a processor has no storage capabilities so none of this data can be tracked if you're using a live boot OS. Turn on wireshark and look for packets leaving to intel, you wont find any.
a processor has no storage capabilities so none of this data can be tracked
ME has access to disks and network cards below the whatever OS you use, it's the ultimate backdoor
ME is Intel, so anything without Intel doesn't have it. Also you can disable ME... While it could be argued that disabling is a placebo.. the video is combining truth with disinformation.
yes it would, but that's not the point. What im saying is that a processor alone does not have the storage capabilities to track everything you do on your PC. In order for that data to be useful it would need a place to save it, memory would be a bad choice since its volatile. So the CPU would need to save it to a HD or send it to a server right away.
That's why I said to use a live boot OS, then if "EVERYTHING" is saved as the video claims the CPU has no option but to send it to a server. That's where another machine comes in. The original, live booted computer (PCA) will need to send the data using standardized Ethernet frames because that is what the internet is built on. Those frame would be sent to the second computer (PCB) where they could be stored or read before being encapsulated and sent as a TCP segment to the internet.
Yes PCB would be doing the same and you would have no way to catch that, but catching it from PCA would let you know enough about the intel ME PDU to block those ports and or IPs. And thats IF they even exist.
Unrealistic. That would require that it's on die or using an external chip that would be noticable to the naked eye on every motherboard. Those types of ROM are not big enough to store much data. Unless you're saying every single motherboard manufacturer is in on these scheme, even competition to Intel.
Yes these low-level backdoors seem more for physical compromise. I don't see any evidence these low-level backdoors can be used from over the internet (at least without some extra software being installed). So doesn't that mean we're protected on Linux, especially if Intel's and AMD's "management" features are disabled?
This is ring-1 we're talking about. Nothing will be shown on Wireshark because those packets never reached the host OS. It's a self-contained system. If you're gonna take a look at the packets you need to do it at the router level.
Okay first off Wireshark can be ran on a third party machine with promiscuous access.. and still you're not going to see anything. The video is only providing part truth and part disinformation. Do you really think this hasn't been investigated till they're blue in the face?
Sure, a test setup would be run linux on a separate machine setup as your default gateway and then send all your traffic from the suspect computer to the linux machine and have the linux machine inspect the traffic before routing it out to the internet. This would allow you to see all the data leaving that PC.
OK, great. Now you have yourself a whole pile of encrypted data. Good job. You should be proud. I don't know what you think you're going to do with it. But you have accomplished your goal of collecting the data which is more than what most of the waste of flesh at this site will do in their entire lives.
You wouldn't route it through the machine, you'd run the NIC that is doing the spying in promiscuous mode. Unless you intend to alter the data, there is no reason to capture and middle man it.
IWishIWasFoxMulder ago
Hoping that RISC-V open source chips will render this obsolete
FriedChicken ago
The real kicker here is that lots of R&D for chips happens in Israel
s2s ago
Talpiot. Not the tomb.
s2s
xExekut3x ago
2008 onward... It's like obama's election was the start of some world-wide takeover, but Trump put a hold on it, and now they're pissed.
polygeek ago
Hardly Obama. This was set in motion years prior.
jc99ta ago
I firmly believe he was to be the wedge to Hillary's mallet that would destroy the US as we know it. Hell, he said it himself that he would fundamentally transform America.
polygeek ago
There were so many powerful people around him in his early days, it's hard not to believe he'd been groomed.
In this case, I have a much easier time believing Intel has a bunch of greedy/spineless people who rolled over at the request of a state power. Even if BHO blessed the program it would take many months to ramp up production then test/etc.
Fateswebb ago
The video is providing disinformation. Only part of what it says is true.
Computergeek01 ago
and IPMI, and iDRAC and AMD Secure Technology ... Seriously, this stuff is useful
Scroobius ago
Intel is Israels backdoor into our computers.
TheTrigger ago
So when's the patch coming out for me to turn these couple of dusty old boxes that are in the closet in to my own little beowulf cluster cluster?
carlip ago
who cares? a processor has no storage capabilities so none of this data can be tracked if you're using a live boot OS. Turn on wireshark and look for packets leaving to intel, you wont find any.
Cincosiber ago
carlip ago
Great good job on ignoring the rest of what I said.
Cincosiber ago
i did read what you said an how people had replied, wasn't clear originally if you were trying to down play the ME threat.
I thought ME would also bypass Linux? better use a non Intel based machine or somthing without ME on board, does that exist?
Fateswebb ago
ME is Intel, so anything without Intel doesn't have it. Also you can disable ME... While it could be argued that disabling is a placebo.. the video is combining truth with disinformation.
carlip ago
yes it would, but that's not the point. What im saying is that a processor alone does not have the storage capabilities to track everything you do on your PC. In order for that data to be useful it would need a place to save it, memory would be a bad choice since its volatile. So the CPU would need to save it to a HD or send it to a server right away.
That's why I said to use a live boot OS, then if "EVERYTHING" is saved as the video claims the CPU has no option but to send it to a server. That's where another machine comes in. The original, live booted computer (PCA) will need to send the data using standardized Ethernet frames because that is what the internet is built on. Those frame would be sent to the second computer (PCB) where they could be stored or read before being encapsulated and sent as a TCP segment to the internet.
Yes PCB would be doing the same and you would have no way to catch that, but catching it from PCA would let you know enough about the intel ME PDU to block those ports and or IPs. And thats IF they even exist.
Synxsynxsynx ago
It has eeprom
carlip ago
Unrealistic. That would require that it's on die or using an external chip that would be noticable to the naked eye on every motherboard. Those types of ROM are not big enough to store much data. Unless you're saying every single motherboard manufacturer is in on these scheme, even competition to Intel.
Synxsynxsynx ago
Uhh, it is an eeprom with software images that are executed against the management engine.
https://www.cnx-software.com/2017/11/07/minix-based-intel-management-engine-firmware-uefi-are-closed-source-insecure-nerf-to-the-rescue/
trotskyberg ago
Yes these low-level backdoors seem more for physical compromise. I don't see any evidence these low-level backdoors can be used from over the internet (at least without some extra software being installed). So doesn't that mean we're protected on Linux, especially if Intel's and AMD's "management" features are disabled?
Synxsynxsynx ago
Not discounting what you're saying. Intel me\vPro isn't scary, in the enterprise realm it's very useful.
NarrativeControl ago
This is ring-1 we're talking about. Nothing will be shown on Wireshark because those packets never reached the host OS. It's a self-contained system. If you're gonna take a look at the packets you need to do it at the router level.
Fateswebb ago
Okay first off Wireshark can be ran on a third party machine with promiscuous access.. and still you're not going to see anything. The video is only providing part truth and part disinformation. Do you really think this hasn't been investigated till they're blue in the face?
carlip ago
Sure, a test setup would be run linux on a separate machine setup as your default gateway and then send all your traffic from the suspect computer to the linux machine and have the linux machine inspect the traffic before routing it out to the internet. This would allow you to see all the data leaving that PC.
Corpse_washer ago
Pros use the power lines. Have fun monitoring network traffic.
Computergeek01 ago
OK, great. Now you have yourself a whole pile of encrypted data. Good job. You should be proud. I don't know what you think you're going to do with it. But you have accomplished your goal of collecting the data which is more than what most of the waste of flesh at this site will do in their entire lives.
Fateswebb ago
You cannot route encrypted data without at least the source and destination being unencrypted.....
Computergeek01 ago
You wouldn't route it through the machine, you'd run the NIC that is doing the spying in promiscuous mode. Unless you intend to alter the data, there is no reason to capture and middle man it.
carlip ago
the IP and ports cannot be encrypted, so I would just block those at the router and they would never get my data.
albatrosv15 ago
Ettercap.
Cincosiber ago
And this can intercept the raw packets without them reaching ME first for cleansing?
albatrosv15 ago
Nope.
BitChuteArchive ago
https://www.bitchute.com/video/4wOBunqfEFiP