by jordigh on 10/10/17, 8:59 PM
It makes me so unhappy that this is what things have come to. They make hardware that we can't control, there's no real alternative to buy, and now we gotta rely on volunteers and wiki pages to give instructions that might work but who knows you might brick it.
I wish there was more widespread outrage over ME and PSP and "trusted computing" so we could collectively tell them to stop selling this garbage. There's so much cynicism out there, though, that I think the public would hardly bat an eye if they knew that all hardware since 2008 or so has secret backdoors. We're just used to this kind of abuse and control.
I haven't bought a new computer since 2007 because I don't want backdoored hardware. If it really is For My Own Safety, as they advertise it to us, then let me control it!
by hilmipilmi on 10/11/17, 7:17 AM
It feels reassuring that you can actually get access and read the assembly of the IME now, thanks to
https://github.com/ptresearch/unME11. For instance
using the the Gigabrix-BSi5ha-6200 IME Firmware update archive:
1. Download and unzip the Gigabrix-BSi5ha-6200 IME update archive (http://download.gigabyte.us/FileList/BIOS/brix_bios_bsi5-h-a...). Use F5_BIOS/image.bin from that archive.
2. Start "python unME11.py image.bin"
3. The uncompressed modules are located in image/00004000.FTPR/* after that
4. You can i.e. load image/00004000.FTPR/kernel.mod in IDA using 80486 in 32bit real-mode or use
"objdump -m i386 -b binary -D kernel.mod --adjust-vma=0x80000" with entry point being 0x80000
or
"objdump -m i386 -b binary -D bup.mod --adjust-vma=0x2d000" with entry point being 0x2D04C
by jadbox on 10/10/17, 7:52 PM
I bet you that the next generation of Intel processors will have patched this workaround from working, and maybe go as far removing the ability to kill IME unless you use some kind of rotating encryption dongle. Unfortunately for consumers, there's no way to escape this as even AMD has their own IME.
by silversmith on 10/10/17, 7:54 PM
What caught my eye was "removes (...) Java VM" - I had imagined the ME to be some kind of very basic maintenance task runner, not a full-blown dynamic app environment.
by hoodoof on 10/10/17, 8:52 PM
Really Intel/Apple/Microsoft should provide an official and reliable way to do this.
We see you Intel... with your stinky spies peeping out from the depths of our computers....
by Fice on 10/10/17, 10:48 PM
by j_s on 10/10/17, 11:45 PM
This is particularly relevant in light of the pending BlackHat EU presentation (Dec 2017):
How to hack a turned-off computer, or running unsigned code in Intel ME | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15298833 (Sep 2017, 239 comments)
by subway on 10/11/17, 4:50 AM
Reading through this thread, I can't help but long for the days of it only being a crackpot theory that everything everywhere is owned.
by ddevault on 10/10/17, 8:15 PM
by jkxyz on 10/11/17, 10:25 AM
This is off-topic, but the Gentoo installation guide that this page is a part of is one of the most comprehensive and accessible Linux guides I've ever read. It taught me a lot of Linux concepts that I never needed to use before when setting up cloud VMs, and now I have a fully working installation of Gentoo + GNOME (with an encrypted root partition) that I'm confident in managing and upgrading. I definitely recommend checking out the rest of the guide.
https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Sakaki%27s_EFI_Install_Guide
by squarefoot on 10/11/17, 6:09 PM
Disabling IME and similar bugging subsystems is only a temporary solution: vendors will create a different one with next gen CPUs and all those brave folks dedicating their time to the task of removing/disabling it will be forced to go back to square one: study again, reverse engineer, reflash, brick, try again, etc. That way CPU makers will always be ahead.
We instead need a platform (CPU+peripherals) which is open by design; no more ME or closed device drivers, blobs etc. No matter if it's 10 times slower than the equivalent by Intel or AMD or draws 10 times more current than the corresponding ARM processor; the point is funding such a development, producing it and selling it even to a small fraction of users will send a heck of a message. Also a well crafted PR campaign could do the rest (does your boss know that all his/her files and communications can be accessed by Intel, AMD and every government with ties to them? What about making him/her aware?).
If someone starts a project like that, I'm pretty sure I won't be the only one ready to donate a few quid right now.
by noobermin on 10/10/17, 9:43 PM
Can I get a serious alternative view on this? What purpose does Intel have for things like this exactly? Also, are AMD chips an alternative that can help here?
by binaryapparatus on 10/10/17, 9:29 PM
Let's say I disable or pull out all the network/wireless cards I have. Then what? Any ideas how to connect to the internet otherwise?
I am seriously thinking going Stallman because of this and not connecting to the internet at all, at least not from all the machines.
by fdchn2016 on 10/11/17, 6:53 AM
I don't know why everyone thinks doing this much is safe. If I was the NSA/CIA director, I would put this in as a first level and if anyone figured out how to hack this backdoor, I would have a 2nd and 3rd hidden backdoor or maybe more. Maybe a particular sequence of instructions which opened a backdoor.
by partycoder on 10/10/17, 7:59 PM
Having to build a modchip for your PC exacerbates the need for open source hardware.
by internalfx on 10/10/17, 9:02 PM
Does anyone know if AMD PSP can be disabled?
by GlenTheMachine on 10/10/17, 8:23 PM
Can someone point me to an explanation of exactly what this is, and whether I need to worry about it? Particularly on a home server I built myself from parts?
by std_throwaway on 10/10/17, 8:58 PM
What advantage do I, as a lowly user, have from the ME?
by kxyvr on 10/11/17, 2:11 AM
I'm wondering if someone could clear something up for me. There's the me_cleaner project that the above guide relies on in order to generate the new BIOS image. However, I thought me_cleaner could be run directly without dumping, modifying, and reflashing an image using the Pi. What's the difference in efficacy between the above guide and just using me_cleaner directly?
by craftyguy on 10/10/17, 7:58 PM
Does this require a system with coreboot support? If not, I'm super tempted to try this on my Dell XPS 13 9333..
by e12e on 10/11/17, 10:34 AM
Imagine the havoc if (when?) Intel's code signing keys for IME are leaked? Sure it might be possible to update keys in all the world's post-2006 Intel computers. But in reality it'd be a free for all that makes botnets of home routers look like a needle on a football field...
by achillean on 10/10/17, 10:45 PM
by jlgaddis on 10/10/17, 11:06 PM
I think I'm gonna order the hardware and finally do this on my T420 and W530.
by wheresmyusern on 10/10/17, 8:41 PM
i remember when it was found that me had a "kill switch," wasnt it found that this kill switch still leaves a rather lot of power in the hands of the IME?
by Sephr on 10/11/17, 5:27 AM
In order to test if this breaks any silicon workarounds, someone should run comprehensive benchmarks on their CPU pre and post-IME disabling.
by gigatexal on 10/11/17, 3:58 AM
Makes me happy I am moving to AMD not systems and staying away from their pro line that has this nonsense built in.
by listic on 10/10/17, 9:42 PM
I wonder how should I go about finding a service center/technician competent enough to do that for me?
by earenndil on 10/11/17, 2:36 AM
It says raspberry pi 3b. Can I do it on a pi 0?
by thresh on 10/11/17, 10:18 AM
Does that ruin the BMC/iLo/IPMI?
by moonbug on 10/10/17, 8:28 PM
Aww, Gentoo's still a thing, how cute.