I just read about the backdoor in intel CPU's. I cant find anything saying which CPU's are effected my question is...

I just read about the backdoor in intel CPU's. I cant find anything saying which CPU's are effected my question is. Is the core2 quad effected.

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Backdoor_(computing)
youtube.com/watch?v=vbF_qEaPhNc
youtube.com/watch?v=QDSlWa9xQuA
coreboot.org/Intel_Management_Engine
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

The picture isn't very apt for this case. It's not really convenient feature unless you are big company.

It's just that the impact is so small and theoretic that you don't really need to care, the "left crowd" is just rational in other words. You don't call people not living in underground vaults to protect themselves from lightning strikes sheep, either.

One more thing - try to be technical. It's no backdoor (and if you call it so, it just paints you as a meme-ridden person with adolescent sort of thinking), it's trusted environment and remote management interface.

inb4
>nuances? what's that shit! this is Cred Forums
>pajeet
>something

The only real solution is to not store any personal data on a computer connected to the Internet.

Didn't feel like finding good pic. So I picked one at random.

Can someone answer my question please.

By the definition of back door, AMT fulfils the definition:

>A backdoor is a method, often secret, of bypassing normal authentication in a product, computer system, cryptosystem or algorithm etc.
>Backdoors are often used for securing unauthorized remote access to a computer, or obtaining access to plaintext in cryptographic systems.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Backdoor_(computing)

Here's some of the features AMT allows remotely:

>has full access to memory (without the parent CPU having any knowledge)
>has full access to the TCP/IP stack; can send and receive network packets, even if the OS is protected by a firewall
>is signed with an RSA 2048 key that cannot be brute-forced
>cannot be disabled on newer Intel Core2 CPUs.

It's the definition of perfect back door.

Now, of course AMT being a back door can be disputed, but that's because there's a nice little plausible deniability thrown in by fulfilling a seemingly valid function - remote management by businesses to clients in the field. That's all well and good if you're a trusting sort of person, but to the little more paranoid, warning bells ring.

What is your Core2 model?

As if we all aren't owned at the BIOS level.

youtube.com/watch?v=vbF_qEaPhNc
youtube.com/watch?v=QDSlWa9xQuA

core 2 quad Q6600

>core 2 quad Q6600

No, you're fine with the Q6600. That is, if you don't count microcode ...

What about T9600

>T9600

No I believe that is fine also. The rule of thumb is any Intel CPU/chipset manufactured in or after 2009 runs the risk of having the Management Engine on the chipset.

>I just read about the backdoor in intel CPU's. I cant find anything saying which CPU's are effected my question is. Is the core2 quad effected.


You mean some crazy blog post by a person with an axe to grind ?

>In an article that is equal parts technical and fear-inducing, Damien Zammit is up front about his goal. He declared he had made it his mission to get Intel to replace this system with a free, open source replacement "before it's too late."

>But to get there, you have to break a chip protected by RSA 2048 security on a chip that can't be audited or examined. That's 2,048-bit security, which would require any attempt to break it to factorize semi-primes with approximately 617 decimal digits, which Zammit admits at this point is "pretty much impossible in one human lifetime for anyone with the biggest supercomputer."

>Zammit says his goal isn't to replace Intel's ME, but to provide a minimal libre alternative firmware for users who choose to use it.

And there you go, freetard spreading FUD to scare people/try to achieve his goals.

coreboot.org/Intel_Management_Engine

Still doesn't mean it cannot be used for nefarious means.

looks like shills found the thread. take note guys of the techniques used to spread lies.

>backdoor in intel CPU's.
What movie you watching? Wargames? Why the fuck would a cpu need a backdoor? You dumb shits believe anything.

>What movie you watching? When Harry Met Sally? Why the fuck would a person need to orgasm? You dumb shits believe anything.

Freedom? You dopes throw that word around and don't even realize what slaves you are. Geezus.

the one where shills invade threads on Cred Forums :^)

As it is a method within the network it cannot be addressed from outside unless it creates a connection out.
As it is hidden from everything it cannot be addressed by software on the system, so malware cannot engage it to make nefarious connections out.
It can still be blocked by your network based firewalls/routers.

>As it is a method within the network it cannot be addressed from outside unless it creates a connection out.

Wrong. You misunderstand the implications.

>As it is hidden from everything it cannot be addressed by software on the system, so malware cannot engage it to make nefarious connections out.

No-one mentioned malware in conjunction with AMT so this point is moot.

>It can still be blocked by your network based firewalls/routers.

Ah k. So ports 80/443 are blocked yeah?

Go back to sleep.

>firewalls are as simple as just blocking ports
Why are you even here?