News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Experiments with disabling the ME on Sandybridge x230. Parent comment

Re:Experiments with disabling the ME on Sandybridge x230 by drvdevd on Tuesday September 13, 2016 @02:12PM (#12490818)
My next question is (and it's probably mentioned further in the thread or manual somewhere): how does the ME chipset route traffic to the Internet in the first place? Piggyback off the OS? Does this mean it's directly coupled with the networking devices on the system somehow? Presumably it will work with any OS....
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Experiments with disabling the ME on Sandybridge x230 by yuhong on Tuesday September 13, 2016 @02:12PM (#12490824)
AMT requires Intel NICs for that reason.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Experiments with disabling the ME on Sandybridge x230 by DashRattlesnake on Tuesday September 13, 2016 @03:04PM (#12491257)
So could you neutralize its communication functions (to a degree) by using a non-Intel NIC? Would a non-chipset Intel NIC accomplish the same thing?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Experiments with disabling the ME on Sandybridge x230 by djsumdog on Tuesday September 13, 2016 @05:53PM (#12492580)
but it still needs and IP address right? Does ME does its own DHCP/BOOTP configuration or does it rely on some other protocol specific to Intel NICs/Intel infrastructure?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Experiments with disabling the ME on Sandybridge x230 by jcrawfordor on Tuesday September 13, 2016 @07:24PM (#12493061)
The AMT component must be specifically configured with network information. It is usually kept on a different interface from that used by the OS for security reasons.
[ Parent | on HN ]